OLIVIA DAVIES v. LAU SHEK YAU JOHN and Others
Ordered specific discovery in part: documents and classes that were relevant to the pleaded conspiracy and company management were to be disclosed but restricted to the relevant period covering the alleged overt acts (September–November 1992). Requests that were unreasonably broad or not probative (eg telephone...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- OLIVIA DAVIES v. LAU SHEK YAU JOHN and Others
- Parties
- Plaintiff: OLIVIA DAVIES; First Defendant: LAU SHEK YAU JOHN; Second Defendant: WONG CHANG GLORIA; Third Defendant: CHU KA TING MICHAEL; Fourth Defendant: WONG SIK WOON STEPHEN; Fifth Defendant: CCD & ASSOCIATES LIMITED; Sixth Defendant: CAO YUN; Seventh Defendant: LIN CHIA CHENG; Eighth Defendant: KING BRILLIANT LIMITED; Ninth Defendant: METROADS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 11 September 1995
- Case Number
- HCA3617/1994
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Conspiracy and Company/shareholder Dispute (discovery Application) / Interlocutory Hearing on Specific Discovery and Appeal From Master's Partial Order
- Outcome
- Particular discovery ordered in part and limited to the relevant period (Sept–Nov 1992); certain requests refused as overbroad or not relevant; costs awarded to plaintiff (order nisi).
- Legal Topics
- Specific Discovery, Disclosure, Relevance, Fiduciary Duties, Constructive Trust, Scope of Documents, Limitation of Discovery Period
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
OLIVIA DAVIES
Plaintiff
LAU SHEK YAU JOHN
First Defendant
WONG CHANG GLORIA
Second Defendant
CHU KA TING MICHAEL
Third Defendant
WONG SIK WOON STEPHEN
Fourth Defendant
CCD & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
Fifth Defendant
CAO YUN
Sixth Defendant
LIN CHIA CHENG
Seventh Defendant
KING BRILLIANT LIMITED
Eighth Defendant
METROADS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Ninth Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Conspiracy and Company/shareholder Dispute (discovery Application) / Interlocutory Hearing on Specific Discovery and Appeal From Master's Partial Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case entitling her to specific discovery of listed documents
- 2 Whether requested classes of documents are relevant and proportionate to the issues
- 3 Whether discovery should be limited to the period of the alleged overt acts
Ratio Decidendi
Ordered specific discovery in part: documents and classes that were relevant to the pleaded conspiracy and company management were to be disclosed but restricted to the relevant period covering the alleged overt acts (September–November 1992). Requests that were unreasonably broad or not probative (eg telephone itemised bills, catch-all requests for all documents relevant to the conspiracy) were refused. Where defendants were linked and documents likely held by any of them, orders were made against all defendants. Costs awarded against defendants with an order nisi and certificate for counsel.
Court Disposition
Particular discovery ordered in part and limited to the relevant period (Sept–Nov 1992); certain requests refused as overbroad or not relevant; costs awarded to plaintiff (order nisi).
Orders
- Defendants to give discovery within 14 days to the extent indicated in the judgment limited to the relevant period (September to November 1992).
- Discovery ordered for correspondence between the fifth defendant and Shanghai Metro Corporation; statutory books and minutes of directors' and shareholders' meetings; ledger accounts; cheque books and cheque stubs; management and audited accounts for the relevant period; employment letters/contracts for the relevant...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment