WILLIAM JOHN LAU v. WAN YUK LIN ALISON AND OTHERS

WILLIAM JOHN LAU v. WAN YUK LIN ALISON AND OTHERS

The court exercised its discretion to disallow the majority of the interrogatories as irrelevant, duplicative or better addressed at trial or by document production; allowed limited parts of Interrogatory 3 against the 1st respondent (the first set up to the penultimate sentence) to enable case preparation; treated the December interrogatories as a separate second set and ordered their withdrawal; restrained further interrogatories without leave; awarded the 1st and 3rd respondents 7/8 of their costs in the summonses.

Citation
WILLIAM JOHN LAU v. WAN YUK LIN ALISON AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: William John Lau; 1st Respondent: Wan Yuk Lin Alison; 2nd Respondent: Lee Wai Shuen Angela; 3rd Respondent: Yau Wai Kuen; 4th Respondent: Skydon Development Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 May 2009
Case Number
HCCW576/2007
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) (petition Under Sections 168 a and 177(1)(f) of the Companies Ordinance) / Interlocutory Hearing (application to Withdraw Interrogatories and for Costs)
Outcome
Summonses largely granted; interrogatories mostly withdrawn or disallowed with limited exception; costs awarded to respondents
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Discovery, Costs Orders, Director Loans, Validation Order, Petition for Relief
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Insolvency Law Interrogatories Discovery Costs Orders Director Loans Validation Order +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 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William John Lau

Petitioner

Wan Yuk Lin Alison

1st Respondent

Lee Wai Shuen Angela

2nd Respondent

Yau Wai Kuen

3rd Respondent

Skydon Development Limited

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up) (petition Under Sections 168 a and 177(1)(f) of the Companies Ordinance) / Interlocutory Hearing (application to Withdraw Interrogatories and for Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interrogatories served were relevant and necessary for disposing fairly of the petition or for saving costs
  2. 2 Whether the December 2008 interrogatories were a separate (second) set and required leave
  3. 3 Scope of permissible interrogatories as against directors and officers

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to disallow the majority of the interrogatories as irrelevant, duplicative or better addressed at trial or by document production; allowed limited parts of Interrogatory 3 against the 1st respondent (the first set up to the penultimate sentence) to enable case preparation; treated the December interrogatories as a separate second set and ordered their withdrawal; restrained further interrogatories without leave; awarded the 1st and 3rd respondents 7/8 of their costs in the summonses.

Court Disposition

Summonses largely granted; interrogatories mostly withdrawn or disallowed with limited exception; costs awarded to respondents

Orders

  • Petitioner\'s interrogatories dated 7 November 2008 filed and served on the 1st respondent are withdrawn except for interrogatory numbered 3 up to the penultimate sentence which the 1st respondent is ordered to answer within 21 days
  • Petitioner\'s interrogatories dated 5 December 2008 served on the 1st respondent are withdrawn