Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Confidentiality of documents

Legal area

Court

31 Aug 2012

LIU HING SANG v. ESTATE OF LI KWAN, DECEASED AND ANOTHER

Citation

LIU HING SANG v. ESTATE OF LI KWAN, DECEASED AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI665/2009

The court ordered disclosure only of the Unopposed Documents and confirmation of non-existence of certain documents, but dismissed the application for the broad disclosure sought under Classes 2 and 4-6 because those classes were either irrelevant to the issues (Mr Liu's prospects with Miramar and freelance work), too wide, invaded third‑party personal/confidential information and were not necessary for fairly disposing of the matter or saving costs.
25 Oct 2007

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN

Citation

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV254/2007

The Court held the orders should stand: advance production of documents with confidentiality restrictions and a prohibition on discussing those documents with legal advisers absent consent or leave is a proportionate and lawful measure to protect the integrity of s221 examinations and confidentiality of materials; the direction does not infringe Article 35 because the right to legal advice is not absolute and the examinee retains the ability to seek advice with court or liquidators' permission and is not prejudiced given s221's non‑adversarial nature and absence of trial protections against s…
25 Oct 2007

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN

Citation

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV253/2007

The Court of Appeal held that the order prohibiting the examinee from discussing documents provided in advance with legal advisers was a proportionate and legitimate restriction within the s221 examination procedure to prevent coaching, contamination and to protect confidentiality; the restriction did not infringe Article 35 because the right to legal advice is not absolute and the examinee retains the ability to seek the court's leave or the liquidators' consent for consultation.
12 Jun 2006

RE KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION)

Citation

RE KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW49/2000

The court upheld the Master's limited restriction: an examinee retains the right to seek legal advice generally about the examination but may not, without leave of the court, go through the specific documents supplied by the liquidators with legal advisers prior to the oral s221 examination because doing so poses a real risk of tainting the examinee's evidence and disclosing other examinees' material; leave can be sought identifying the specific areas of advice required.
22 Apr 2005

PETER PO FUN CHAN v. THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

Citation

PETER PO FUN CHAN v. THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV87/2004

Leave to appeal was refused because the points the applicant sought to raise had already been dealt with in prior judgments and did not raise questions of great general or public importance; multiple courts had concluded there was no case fit for trial and alleged secret copying of documents did not create a ground for leave.

Hong Kong Case Law

LIU HING SANG v. ESTATE OF LI KWAN, DECEASED AND ANOTHER

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN

THE JOINT & SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) v. KIN YUEN

RE KONG WAH HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION)

PETER PO FUN CHAN v. THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE