CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. CHAN CHUN CHUEN AND OTHERS

CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. CHAN CHUN CHUEN AND OTHERS

Leave was granted because Mr Westwood’s report raised relevant matters apparently omitted from the existing expert reports and, on balance of case management, prejudice and the objective of just resolution, admission of his evidence (with directions for expert meeting and joint statement) was necessary and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. CHAN CHUN CHUEN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: 1st Defendant; Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 May 2009
Case Number
HCAP8/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Probate Dispute (alleged Forgery of Will) / Pre Trial/chambers Application for Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence
Outcome
Leave granted to the 1st Defendant to adduce evidence from handwriting expert Mr Paul Westwood
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Expert Shopping, Handwriting Analysis, Case Management, Estoppel/election, Forgery, Disclosure of Expert Reports
Source Language
en
Civil Evidence Procedure Probate Forensic Handwriting Equity Expert Evidence Expert Shopping +5 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

1st Defendant

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Probate Dispute (alleged Forgery of Will) / Pre Trial/chambers Application for Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to adduce evidence from a substitute handwriting expert after expert directions lapsed
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant engaged in impermissible expert shopping
  3. 3 Whether prior indications that no expert would be called estop the 1st Defendant from seeking leave

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because Mr Westwood’s report raised relevant matters apparently omitted from the existing expert reports and, on balance of case management, prejudice and the objective of just resolution, admission of his evidence (with directions for expert meeting and joint statement) was necessary and proportionate despite concerns about expert shopping and prior representations.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the 1st Defendant to adduce evidence from handwriting expert Mr Paul Westwood

Orders

  • Leave granted to the 1st Defendant to adduce evidence from handwriting expert Mr Paul Westwood
  • Directions for experts: meeting between Dr Radley and Mr Paul Westwood and production of a joint expert statement