ALEXINA INVESTMENTS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. KEYSBERG LTD. AND OTHERS

ALEXINA INVESTMENTS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. KEYSBERG LTD. AND OTHERS

Defendants failed to establish on the totality of material that additional undisclosed documents exist; affidavits sworn by authorised deponents asserting no further documents stand unrefuted and are conclusive; even if an inference of undisclosed documents could be drawn, the court would exercise its discretion under Order 24 r.16 to refuse further discovery to prevent prolonged satellite litigation and to promote an expeditious trial. Therefore the summonses for further discovery are dismissed.

Citation
ALEXINA INVESTMENTS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. KEYSBERG LTD. AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Alexina Investments Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Sovereign Nominees Limited (formerly Roche Nominees Limited); 1st Defendant: Keysberg Limited; 2nd Defendant: Collinwood Limited; 3rd Defendant: Carrasco Investments Limited; 4th Defendant: Manohar Rajaram Chhabria; 5th Defendant: Jumbo International Holdings Ltd; 6th Defendant: Chandru Samtani; Third Party: Vijay Mallya
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 March 2002
Case Number
HCA6359/1992
Procedural Posture
Civil Discovery Proceedings / Interlocutory (summons for Further Discovery)
Outcome
Two summonses for further discovery dismissed
Legal Topics
Further Discovery, Affidavit of No Further Documents, Unless Order, Strike Out, Trust Beneficial Ownership, Joint Venture Dispute, Costs, Case Management
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Discovery Trusts Contract Equity Further Discovery Affidavit of No Further Documents Unless Order +5 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexina Investments Limited

1st Plaintiff

Sovereign Nominees Limited (formerly Roche Nominees Limited)

2nd Plaintiff

Keysberg Limited

1st Defendant

Collinwood Limited

2nd Defendant

Carrasco Investments Limited

3rd Defendant

Manohar Rajaram Chhabria

4th Defendant

Jumbo International Holdings Ltd

5th Defendant

Chandru Samtani

6th Defendant

Vijay Mallya

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Discovery Proceedings / Interlocutory (summons for Further Discovery)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether affidavits asserting no further documents are conclusive
  2. 2 Whether the court can infer existence of undisclosed documents from affidavits and produced materials
  3. 3 Whether the court should order further discovery under Order 24 rule 16

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to establish on the totality of material that additional undisclosed documents exist; affidavits sworn by authorised deponents asserting no further documents stand unrefuted and are conclusive; even if an inference of undisclosed documents could be drawn, the court would exercise its discretion under Order 24 r.16 to refuse further discovery to prevent prolonged satellite litigation and to promote an expeditious trial. Therefore the summonses for further discovery are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Two summonses for further discovery dismissed

Orders

  • Two summonses dismissed
  • Costs to be heard