COMPETITION COMMISSION v. MULTISOFT LTD AND OTHERS

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. MULTISOFT LTD AND OTHERS

The Tribunal will not routinely order the Competition Commission to file a verifying affirmation for disclosure. Verification orders should not be automatic; they must be sought and justified by reference to special reasons explained in supporting evidence. Practical considerations (verification often being by senior legal staff and unlikely to materially increase diligence, and criminal prosecutions not being routinely required to verify disclosure) support leaving verification to case‑specific orders rather than routine directions.

Citation
[2023] HKCT 8
Parties
Applicant: Competition Commission; 1st Respondent: Multisoft Limited; 2nd Respondent: MTT Group Holdings Limited; 3rd Respondent: BP Enterprise Company Limited; 4th Respondent: Noble Nursing Home Company Limited; 5th Respondent: Kwek Studio Limited; 6th Respondent: Au Yeung Kit Yee (trading as Yat Ying Hong and in her personal capacity); 7th Respondent: Fan Sing Chi; 8th Respondent: Tang Wai Chun
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 August 2023
Case Number
CTEA1/2023
Procedural Posture
Competition Enforcement (tribunal Enforcement Action) / First Case Management Conference; Directions Hearing
Outcome
Tribunal directed case management measures and declined to impose a routine requirement that the Commission file a verifying affirmation for disclosure; verification may be ordered in specific cases where special reasons are shown.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Verification of Disclosure (affirmation/affidavit), Confidentiality Ring, Pecuniary Penalty Proceedings, Case Management Directions
Source Language
EN
Competition Law Civil Procedure Evidence Disclosure Disclosure Verification of Disclosure (affirmation/affidavit) Confidentiality Ring Pecuniary Penalty Proceedings Case Management Directions

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Competition Commission

Applicant

Multisoft Limited

1st Respondent

MTT Group Holdings Limited

2nd Respondent

BP Enterprise Company Limited

3rd Respondent

Noble Nursing Home Company Limited

4th Respondent

Kwek Studio Limited

5th Respondent

Au Yeung Kit Yee (trading as Yat Ying Hong and in her personal capacity)

6th Respondent

Fan Sing Chi

7th Respondent

Tang Wai Chun

8th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Competition Enforcement (tribunal Enforcement Action) / First Case Management Conference; Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Competition Commission should be routinely required to file a verifying affirmation/affidavit in respect of disclosure
  2. 2 Whether enforcement proceedings for pecuniary penalty require additional procedural protection because they involve determination of a criminal charge
  3. 3 Whether Tribunal rules or practice require verification of disclosure and when a verification order is justified

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal will not routinely order the Competition Commission to file a verifying affirmation for disclosure. Verification orders should not be automatic; they must be sought and justified by reference to special reasons explained in supporting evidence. Practical considerations (verification often being by senior legal staff and unlikely to materially increase diligence, and criminal prosecutions not being routinely required to verify disclosure) support leaving verification to case‑specific orders rather than routine directions.

Court Disposition

Tribunal directed case management measures and declined to impose a routine requirement that the Commission file a verifying affirmation for disclosure; verification may be ordered in specific cases where special reasons are shown.

Orders

  • Case management directions made including a confidentiality ring in conventional terms
  • No routine requirement for the Commission to file a verifying affirmation or affidavit for disclosure; any such requirement must be ordered on application and justified by evidence of special reasons