LEUNG PING CHIU, ROY appointed by Order dated 12th May 2020 to represent the ESTATE OF YANG FOO-OI, since deceased v. WAI WAI CHEN
The court accepted the Expert's assessment that the additional accounting and company documents (items 6-15) were necessary and likely readily available, rejected the defendants' objections that production would be unduly burdensome, confidential or legally impermissible for tracing purposes, and ordered disclosure to the Expert and service on the plaintiff within a fixed period; the implied undertaking and procedural safeguards suffice to protect third-party confidentiality and prevent collateral use.
- Citation
- [2022] HKCFI 1897
- Parties
- Plaintiff (next Friend for the Estate of Yang Foo Oi): Leung Ping Chiu, Roy (appointed to represent the Estate of Yang Foo-Oi); 1st Defendant: Wai Wai Chen; 2nd Defendant: Timford Resources Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 21 June 2022
- Case Number
- HCA1739/2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Fiduciary Breach; Equitable Remedies (account of Profits V Equitable Compensation) / Interlocutory Post Judgment Discovery in Aid of Election; Application for Disclosure to Court Appointed Expert
- Outcome
- Order for disclosure granted in favour of the plaintiff; Expert's Request for additional documents (items 6-15 as amended) allowed; plaintiff to be served with materials and affirmation; compliance within 42 days
- Legal Topics
- Post Judgment Discovery, Expert Appointed Disclosure, Tracing Remedies, Confidentiality and Implied Undertaking, Election Between Equitable Compensation and Account of Profits
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Leung Ping Chiu, Roy (appointed to represent the Estate of Yang Foo-Oi)
Plaintiff (next Friend for the Estate of Yang Foo Oi)
Wai Wai Chen
1st Defendant
Timford Resources Limited
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Fiduciary Breach; Equitable Remedies (account of Profits V Equitable Compensation) / Interlocutory Post Judgment Discovery in Aid of Election; Application for Disclosure to Court Appointed Expert
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should order production of additional documents requested by the court-appointed expert
- 2 Scope of discovery in aid of election between equitable compensation and account of profits
- 3 Whether plaintiff may trace beyond first-level profits and obtain discovery for tracing purposes
Ratio Decidendi
The court accepted the Expert's assessment that the additional accounting and company documents (items 6-15) were necessary and likely readily available, rejected the defendants' objections that production would be unduly burdensome, confidential or legally impermissible for tracing purposes, and ordered disclosure to the Expert and service on the plaintiff within a fixed period; the implied undertaking and procedural safeguards suffice to protect third-party confidentiality and prevent collateral use.
Court Disposition
Order for disclosure granted in favour of the plaintiff; Expert's Request for additional documents (items 6-15 as amended) allowed; plaintiff to be served with materials and affirmation; compliance within 42 days
Orders
- Disclosure of the documents and information listed in the Expert's Appendix 2 (as amended) is ordered
- Compliance with the disclosure order to be effected within 42 days from the date of the decision (21 June 2022)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment