EDWARD MARTIN WILLIAMS v. THE HONGKONG LAND PROPERTY CO LTD AND ANOTHER

EDWARD MARTIN WILLIAMS v. THE HONGKONG LAND PROPERTY CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Appeal allowed: the 1st defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving the dominant purpose of the loss adjuster report was litigation; affidavit evidence was unsatisfactory and did not identify sources; therefore privilege was not established and the report must be disclosed.

Citation
EDWARD MARTIN WILLIAMS v. THE HONGKONG LAND PROPERTY CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Edward Martin Williams; 1st Defendant: The Hongkong Land Property Company Limited; 2nd Defendant: ISS Servisystem (HK) Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 October 2003
Case Number
HCPI522/2001
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries; Contribution Proceedings Between Defendants / Appeal to High Court (chambers) From Master's Dismissal of Discovery Summons
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master's order dismissed and 2nd defendant's application for discovery allowed
Legal Topics
Discovery, Legal Advice/anticipation of Litigation, Dominant Purpose Test, Loss Adjuster Reports, Contribution Between Defendants
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Insurance Law Personal Injury Legal Professional Privilege Discovery Legal Advice/anticipation of Litigation Dominant Purpose Test +2 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Martin Williams

Plaintiff

The Hongkong Land Property Company Limited

1st Defendant

ISS Servisystem (HK) Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries; Contribution Proceedings Between Defendants / Appeal to High Court (chambers) From Master's Dismissal of Discovery Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the GAB Robins loss adjuster report and associated witness statements are protected by legal advice/ Litigation privilege
  2. 2 What is the dominant purpose for which the report was prepared
  3. 3 Who bears the onus of proof to establish privilege and adequacy of affidavit evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal allowed: the 1st defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving the dominant purpose of the loss adjuster report was litigation; affidavit evidence was unsatisfactory and did not identify sources; therefore privilege was not established and the report must be disclosed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master's order dismissed and 2nd defendant's application for discovery allowed

Orders

  • The 2nd defendant's application by summons dated 30 June 2003 is allowed
  • The report and associated statements prepared by GAB Robins and related materials are to be disclosed