UNIMAX PROPERTY CONSULTANCY LTD v. NG LAI CHING AND ANOTHER

UNIMAX PROPERTY CONSULTANCY LTD v. NG LAI CHING AND ANOTHER

Applicant failed to establish prima facie that the outstanding classes of documents existed and were within defendants' possession, custody or control; defendants' sworn affirmations of non‑possession were accepted and, exercising judicial discretion, the court refused to order production of those outstanding classes.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 45
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: 1st Defendant; Defendant: 2nd Defendant; Company (subject of Dispute): Unimax (management company)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 January 2019
Case Number
HCA2575/2018
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Document Production and Ancillary Relief / Interlocutory Hearing/application
Outcome
No order for production of the outstanding classes of documents; application refused in respect of those classes
Legal Topics
Document Production, Discovery, Interlocutory Injunction, Directors' Access to Books, Employment Tax Returns
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Evidence Injunctions Costs Document Production Discovery Interlocutory Injunction +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

1st Defendant

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

Unimax (management company)

Company (subject of Dispute)

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Document Production and Ancillary Relief / Interlocutory Hearing/application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant adduced prima facie evidence that the outstanding classes of documents exist and are in the defendants' possession, custody or control
  2. 2 Standard for granting interlocutory relief including balance of convenience and irreparable prejudice
  3. 3 Whether court should exercise discretion to order production where respondents affirm non-possession

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to establish prima facie that the outstanding classes of documents existed and were within defendants' possession, custody or control; defendants' sworn affirmations of non‑possession were accepted and, exercising judicial discretion, the court refused to order production of those outstanding classes.

Court Disposition

No order for production of the outstanding classes of documents; application refused in respect of those classes

Orders

  • No order for production of the outstanding classes of documents as set out in the Summons