MILIBOW ASSETS SERVICES LTD. v. DOOYANG HONG KONG LTD.

MILIBOW ASSETS SERVICES LTD. v. DOOYANG HONG KONG LTD.

The court held that particulars must be provided where necessary but many requests were answered, withdrawn or were adequately pleaded; discovery is limited to documents which a party in fact has or had in its possession custody or power and documents held merely by a parent or other group company are not automatically discoverable; DHK and RSL were ordered to produce documents that were within their custody as specified, while Milibow's broad discovery applications were refused except to the extent the documents are in the party's own custody; interrogatories served without order were largely disallowed or ordered withdrawn because they were fishing, oppressive or sought evidence rather...

Citation
MILIBOW ASSETS SERVICES LTD. v. DOOYANG HONG KONG LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff in HCA 3810/2000; 1st Defendant in HCA 3994/2000: Milibow Assets Limited; Defendant in HCA 3810/2000; Plaintiff by Counterclaim in HCA 3810/2000: Dooyang Hong Kong Limited; 2nd Defendant by Counterclaim in HCA 3810/2000; 2nd Defendant in HCA 3994/2000: Wellko Industrial (BVI) Limited; Plaintiff in HCA 3994/2000: Rosslyn Services Limited; 3rd Defendant in HCA 3994/2000: Nagy Akram el-Azar; 4th Defendant in HCA 3994/2000: Herman To Yung Sing; 5th Defendant in HCA 3994/2000: Edmond Ip Tak Chuen
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 January 2002
Case Number
HCA3810/2000
Procedural Posture
Civil: Interlocutory Applications (further Particulars, Discovery, Interrogatories) / Interlocutory/pre Trial Applications
Outcome
Interlocutory applications partly allowed and partly refused as set out: many particulars were answered or withdrawn; discovery ordered only for documents in a party's own custody, with DHK and RSL ordered to comply with specified disclosure; most interrogatories served without order disallowed or to be withdrawn;...
Legal Topics
Further and Better Particulars, Specific Discovery, Interrogatories, Piercing Corporate Veil, Joinder, Amendment of Pleadings, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Evidence Discovery Pleadings Further and Better Particulars Specific Discovery Interrogatories +4 more

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Milibow Assets Limited

Plaintiff in HCA 3810/2000; 1st Defendant in HCA 3994/2000

Dooyang Hong Kong Limited

Defendant in HCA 3810/2000; Plaintiff by Counterclaim in HCA 3810/2000

Wellko Industrial (BVI) Limited

2nd Defendant by Counterclaim in HCA 3810/2000; 2nd Defendant in HCA 3994/2000

Rosslyn Services Limited

Plaintiff in HCA 3994/2000

Nagy Akram el-Azar

3rd Defendant in HCA 3994/2000

Herman To Yung Sing

4th Defendant in HCA 3994/2000

Edmond Ip Tak Chuen

5th Defendant in HCA 3994/2000

Procedural Posture

Civil: Interlocutory Applications (further Particulars, Discovery, Interrogatories) / Interlocutory/pre Trial Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further and better particulars should be ordered to define issues
  2. 2 Whether specific discovery can be compelled from party in respect of documents held by parent or other group companies
  3. 3 Whether interrogatories served without court order should be withdrawn as oppressive or fishing

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that particulars must be provided where necessary but many requests were answered, withdrawn or were adequately pleaded; discovery is limited to documents which a party in fact has or had in its possession custody or power and documents held merely by a parent or other group company are not automatically discoverable; DHK and RSL were ordered to produce documents that were within their custody as specified, while Milibow's broad discovery applications were refused except to the extent the documents are in the party's own custody; interrogatories served without order were largely disallowed or ordered withdrawn because they were fishing, oppressive or sought evidence rather...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory applications partly allowed and partly refused as set out: many particulars were answered or withdrawn; discovery ordered only for documents in a party's own custody, with DHK and RSL ordered to comply with specified disclosure; most interrogatories served without order disallowed or to be withdrawn;...

Orders

  • Further and better particulars applications dealt with: specified requests answered, withdrawn or refused as set out in the judgment; RSL must comply with particulars or elect to abandon claims where ordered
  • Milibow's discovery applications in HCA 3810 and HCA 3994 refused except insofar as the documents are or were in the party's own custody, possession or power; liberty to apply on categorisation disputes