HUNG LUNG CHUEN v. LEUNG WING MAN (BONNIE) AND ANOTHER

HUNG LUNG CHUEN v. LEUNG WING MAN (BONNIE) AND ANOTHER

The court held that the scope of discovery was sufficiently defined and relevant; existence and possession were not disputed; accordingly MTR Corporation was directed to produce item 1 as distinct and item 2 as amended to include all correspondence between MTR and the owners committee of Blocks A to D of Kornhill or their representatives for the period 3 April to 22 November 2015, because such documents were relevant to the petitioners proposal concerning the ramp and their early production would facilitate fair disposal and reduce costs.

Citation
HUNG LUNG CHUEN v. LEUNG WING MAN (BONNIE) AND ANOTHER
Parties
Petitioner: Hung Lung Chuen; 1st Respondent: Leung Wing Man (Bonnie); 2nd Respondent: Teng Yu-Yan Anne (Returning Officer for the Kornhill Constituency)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 May 2016
Case Number
HCAL30/2016
Procedural Posture
Election Petition (district Council) / Interlocutory Ruling on Discovery Application
Outcome
Directed MTR Corporation Limited to produce specified documents in items 1 and 2 with amendment to item 2
Legal Topics
Election Petition, Disclosure/discovery, District Councils Ordinance Cap 547, Returning Officer Responsibilities
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Election Law Civil Procedure Discovery Election Petition Disclosure/discovery District Councils Ordinance Cap 547 Returning Officer Responsibilities

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hung Lung Chuen

Petitioner

Leung Wing Man (Bonnie)

1st Respondent

Teng Yu-Yan Anne (Returning Officer for the Kornhill Constituency)

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Election Petition (district Council) / Interlocutory Ruling on Discovery Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether MTR Corporation must produce correspondence including communications with representatives of the owners committee
  2. 2 Whether scope of discovery limited to 3 April to 22 November 2015 is appropriate
  3. 3 Whether item 1 is distinct and must be produced separately

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the scope of discovery was sufficiently defined and relevant; existence and possession were not disputed; accordingly MTR Corporation was directed to produce item 1 as distinct and item 2 as amended to include all correspondence between MTR and the owners committee of Blocks A to D of Kornhill or their representatives for the period 3 April to 22 November 2015, because such documents were relevant to the petitioners proposal concerning the ramp and their early production would facilitate fair disposal and reduce costs.

Court Disposition

Directed MTR Corporation Limited to produce specified documents in items 1 and 2 with amendment to item 2

Orders

  • MTR Corporation Limited to produce item 1 as presently worded in the schedule
  • MTR Corporation Limited to produce item 2 as amended so that MTR shall produce all correspondence between it and the owners committee of Blocks A to D of Kornhill or its representatives covering the period 3 April to 22 November 2015