CHINA LIGHT & POWER CO., LTD. and Another v. MICHAEL EDWARD ASHTON FORD

CHINA LIGHT & POWER CO., LTD. and Another v. MICHAEL EDWARD ASHTON FORD

No order for discovery was made because plaintiffs satisfied the court that discovery was not required; the defendant was not entitled to retain the documents on the ground asserted; the application for a jury trial was refused as the case did not fall within s.33(a) Cap.4 and court discretion did not favor a jury; expert evidence was not required; the court ordered disclosure only of witness names and the scope of their evidence and stood over directions on trial length and method pending further information, and the injunction remains in force.

Citation
CHINA LIGHT & POWER CO., LTD. and Another v. MICHAEL EDWARD ASHTON FORD
Parties
First Plaintiff: China Light & Power Company, Limited; Second Plaintiff: Castle Peak Power Company Limited; Defendant: Michael Edward Ashton Ford
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 September 1993
Case Number
HCA6382/1993
Procedural Posture
Civil (injunctive Relief/dispute Over Possession of Documents) / Adjourned Summons for Directions (interlocutory)
Outcome
Summons for directions disposed: no discovery ordered; jury trial refused; expert evidence refused; order for disclosure limited to names of witnesses and scope of their evidence; other trial management issues stood over; injunction maintained.
Legal Topics
Return of Papers, Use of Documents in Inquest, Discovery Obligations, Jury Trial Application, Expert Evidence Application, Trial Management and Witness Lists
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Confidentiality Discovery Professional Conduct Criminal Allegations (collateral) Return of Papers Use of Documents in Inquest +4 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

China Light & Power Company, Limited

First Plaintiff

Castle Peak Power Company Limited

Second Plaintiff

Michael Edward Ashton Ford

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (injunctive Relief/dispute Over Possession of Documents) / Adjourned Summons for Directions (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order for discovery should be granted in respect of documents alleged to be confidential
  2. 2 Whether the defendant may retain documents on the basis of a potential criminal investigation/cover-up and to prove his innocence
  3. 3 Whether a trial by jury should be ordered under s.33(a) Cap.4

Ratio Decidendi

No order for discovery was made because plaintiffs satisfied the court that discovery was not required; the defendant was not entitled to retain the documents on the ground asserted; the application for a jury trial was refused as the case did not fall within s.33(a) Cap.4 and court discretion did not favor a jury; expert evidence was not required; the court ordered disclosure only of witness names and the scope of their evidence and stood over directions on trial length and method pending further information, and the injunction remains in force.

Court Disposition

Summons for directions disposed: no discovery ordered; jury trial refused; expert evidence refused; order for disclosure limited to names of witnesses and scope of their evidence; other trial management issues stood over; injunction maintained.

Orders

  • No order for discovery
  • Jury trial refused (case does not fall within s.33(a) Cap.4)