ALLIED GROUP LTD. AND ANOTHER v. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER

ALLIED GROUP LTD. AND ANOTHER v. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER

The appeal against the adjournment of specific discovery was dismissed because ordering discovery before determination of the striking-out applications would improperly require defendants to assist plaintiffs in resisting striking-out, reversing the burden of litigation and causing irreparable prejudice; an interim stay of proceedings was granted pending resolution of the striking-out applications as a proper exercise of the court's inherent jurisdiction and case management powers.

Citation
ALLIED GROUP LTD. AND ANOTHER v. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Allied Group Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Allied Properties (H.K.) Limited; 1st Defendant: The Secretary for Justice; 2nd Defendant: Nicholas Charles Allen
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 December 2001
Case Number
HCA4246/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Interlocutory Applications (discovery and Striking Out) / Appeal Against Adjournment of Specific Discovery and Application for Interim Stay Pending Striking Out Applications
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interim stay granted pending determination of the striking-out applications
Legal Topics
Specific Discovery, Striking Out, Interim Stay, Order 24 R10, Implied Undertaking of Non Disclosure
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Disclosure Abuse of Process Case Management Specific Discovery Striking Out Interim Stay Order 24 R10 +1 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allied Group Limited

1st Plaintiff

Allied Properties (H.K.) Limited

2nd Plaintiff

The Secretary for Justice

1st Defendant

Nicholas Charles Allen

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Interlocutory Applications (discovery and Striking Out) / Appeal Against Adjournment of Specific Discovery and Application for Interim Stay Pending Striking Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs should be permitted specific discovery before determination of defendants' striking-out applications
  2. 2 Whether an interim stay of proceedings pending the striking-out applications is appropriate
  3. 3 Whether ordering discovery in these circumstances would unfairly shift the burden of proof and amount to assistance to the plaintiffs in resisting striking-out on grounds of abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against the adjournment of specific discovery was dismissed because ordering discovery before determination of the striking-out applications would improperly require defendants to assist plaintiffs in resisting striking-out, reversing the burden of litigation and causing irreparable prejudice; an interim stay of proceedings was granted pending resolution of the striking-out applications as a proper exercise of the court's inherent jurisdiction and case management powers.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interim stay granted pending determination of the striking-out applications

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the defendants to be taxed if not agreed
  • Interim stay of proceedings pending final disposal of the striking-out applications with liberty to apply