RE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNDER NO. CV 06-6508 RSWL (CWx)

RE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNDER NO. CV 06-6508 RSWL (CWx)

On a proper reading of the letter of request and supporting evidence the request sought evidence for use at the US trial (not pre-trial discovery); the master had jurisdiction under Evidence Ordinance ss.75-76; the topics were sufficiently certain and not a fishing expedition or oppressive; therefore the master's order should be upheld save for a limited variation on who may examine.

Citation
RE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNDER NO. CV 06-6508 RSWL (CWx)
Parties
Applicant (deponent): Chan Ming Yiu; Requesting Party / Plaintiff (us Proceedings): Wham-O, Inc.; Defendant (us Proceedings): SLB Toys USA Inc.; Non Party Corporate Entity (subject of Inquiry): Manley Toys Ltd
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 October 2007
Case Number
HCMP1367/2007
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings Under Order 70 Rule 2 and Evidence Ordinance (assistance to Foreign Proceedings) / Hearing of Application to Set Aside Master's Order (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application dismissed; master's order upheld with variation
Legal Topics
Letters Rogatory, Pre Trial Discovery, Fishing Expedition, Jurisdiction to Order Evidence, Oppression and Vagueness, Deposition Procedure
Source Language
EN

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Ming Yiu

Applicant (deponent)

Wham-O, Inc.

Requesting Party / Plaintiff (us Proceedings)

SLB Toys USA Inc.

Defendant (us Proceedings)

Manley Toys Ltd

Non Party Corporate Entity (subject of Inquiry)

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings Under Order 70 Rule 2 and Evidence Ordinance (assistance to Foreign Proceedings) / Hearing of Application to Set Aside Master's Order (interlocutory)

  1. 1 Whether the Hong Kong court had jurisdiction under Evidence Ordinance ss.75-76 to give effect to the letter of request
  2. 2 Whether the letter of request sought pre-trial discovery (impermissible) or evidence for use at trial (permissible)
  3. 3 Whether the request amounted to an impermissible fishing expedition

Ratio Decidendi

On a proper reading of the letter of request and supporting evidence the request sought evidence for use at the US trial (not pre-trial discovery); the master had jurisdiction under Evidence Ordinance ss.75-76; the topics were sufficiently certain and not a fishing expedition or oppressive; therefore the master's order should be upheld save for a limited variation on who may examine.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; master's order upheld with variation

Orders

  • Application to set aside or vary the master's order dismissed
  • Master's order upheld subject to variation of paragraph 3