LONG HAI HONG (龍海紅) the administratrix of the estate of LEE SO WINSTON (李甦), deceased v. LIU DAN AND ANOTHER

LONG HAI HONG (龍海紅) the administratrix of the estate of LEE SO WINSTON (李甦), deceased v. LIU DAN AND ANOTHER

The appeals were dismissed because the Category 2 request did not precisely identify communications covering the later corrections in Long 2nd and, on the admitted facts in Long's witness statement and pleadings, the communications sought did not relate to any matter in issue but only to credit; consequently there was no jurisdiction to order specific discovery under O.24 r.7.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2116
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff (administratrix of Estate of Lee So Winston): Long Hai Hong; 1st Respondent / 3rd Defendant: Chan Yu, Lydia; 2nd Respondent / 5th Defendant: A J K Company Limited; 3rd Respondent / 1st Defendant: Liu Dan; 2nd Defendant: Xing Zhirong; 4th Defendant: China Terry Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 August 2024
Case Number
HCA1537/2019
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Discovery Appeals Arising From Multi Action Company/share Register Dispute / Hearing of Appeals De Novo and Determination on Specific Discovery and Costs
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Discovery, Witness Statements and Corrections, Rectification of Register of Members, Scope of Discovery, Legal Professional Privilege (not Decided)
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Evidence Discovery Specific Discovery Witness Statements and Corrections Rectification of Register of Members Scope of Discovery +1 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Long Hai Hong

Applicant/plaintiff (administratrix of Estate of Lee So Winston)

Chan Yu, Lydia

1st Respondent / 3rd Defendant

A J K Company Limited

2nd Respondent / 5th Defendant

Liu Dan

3rd Respondent / 1st Defendant

Xing Zhirong

2nd Defendant

China Terry Limited

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Discovery Appeals Arising From Multi Action Company/share Register Dispute / Hearing of Appeals De Novo and Determination on Specific Discovery and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Category 2 communications were sufficiently identified for specific discovery
  2. 2 Whether the requested communications related to a matter in issue or solely to witness credit
  3. 3 Whether specific discovery could be ordered under O.24 r.7 given the admissions in the witness statement

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals were dismissed because the Category 2 request did not precisely identify communications covering the later corrections in Long 2nd and, on the admitted facts in Long's witness statement and pleadings, the communications sought did not relate to any matter in issue but only to credit; consequently there was no jurisdiction to order specific discovery under O.24 r.7.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Discovery Applications (Category 2) dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Madam Long to be paid by the Applying Parties, summarily assessed at HK$140,000