Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Discovery of documents

Legal area

Court

23 May 2024

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

Citation

[2024] HKDC 792
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2191/2023

Leave to appeal denied because the plaintiff failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or that the interlocutory orders were erroneous in law or plainly wrong; the discovery and expert directions were within the court's discretion and scope of the proceedings, no prejudice from reliance on prior affirmations or from correcting cited rules was shown, expert directions were proportionate and adaptable, and the refusal to adjourn was reasonable on the facts.
7 Dec 2023

CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. WILKINSON & GRIST (a firm)

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3208
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP879/2020

The appeal was dismissed because the Foundation failed to identify the specific entries for which further particulars were required; raw contemporaneous time entries were not shown to be relevant or necessary absent evidence impugning WG's integrity; discovery must be proportionate and subject to case management; the Master's exercise of discretion was not disturbed and the Foundation was directed to identify entries within 42 days if it wished to pursue discovery further.
7 Dec 2023

CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. WILKINSON & GRIST (a firm)

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3208
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP882/2020

The appellant must first identify specific entries in the Fee Notes for which further particulars are sought; absent evidence casting doubt on the solicitor's integrity the raw contemporaneous time entries are not relevant or necessary to taxation; the Master's case management decision to require identification was correct and is upheld; appeal dismissed with leave to reapply after compliance with identification direction.
2 Jul 2020

KAEFER A G v. WINFIELD MARINE SERVICES CO LTD

Citation

[2020] HKDC 487
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4320/2019

Although the plaintiff is a foreign company with no Hong Kong assets, on the pleadings the plaintiff demonstrated a very high probability of success and the defendant's change of position defence was defective and insufficiently particularized; the existence of a reciprocal enforcement arrangement with Germany did not, by itself, negate the need to assess merits and enforcement difficulty; accordingly it was not just to order security for costs and the defendant's summons was dismissed while the plaintiff's discovery summons was granted.
1 Aug 2019

i-PRO HOLDINGS LTD v. KONG KAR BONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1837
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1449/2014

The court refused the plaintiff's application to enter judgment despite non‑compliance because the substance of discovery was unresolved: there was no evidential basis that a distinct CPA audit report existed beyond the 'accounts transactions summary' the 1st defendant produced and his misdescription of that document meant the stringent sanction in the unless order was not appropriate; nevertheless the 1st defendant was held accountable for his conduct and ordered to pay costs on a nisi basis.
13 Jul 2018

VERMEERBERGEN PETER ALFRED v. SWISSTRIBE LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1598
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA11/2017

The presiding officer's refusal to decline jurisdiction and transfer the claim was plainly wrong because the matters before the tribunal involved complex contract interpretation and required full and extensive discovery which a lay claimant could not be expected to present adequately in the Labour Tribunal; accordingly section 10 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance and the Panalpina principle mandated transfer to the Court of First Instance, and the PO's order was set aside.
14 Dec 2017

LUK WING YAN v. WING LUNG BANK LTD

Citation

LUK WING YAN v. WING LUNG BANK LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1249/2016

The court granted limited discovery of specified written policies, procedures and manuals relevant to staff fraud monitoring, staff account controls and client transaction monitoring (with geographical and departmental limits where appropriate), refused or declined other broad requests as disproportionate or unsupported, and refused leave to adduce expert evidence because the proposed topics were not a recognised discipline and were not reasonably required or proportionate to the issues in dispute. Costs were ordered: parties' costs in the cause for the discovery application and defendant awa…
3 Mar 2016

DF v. MF (nee Z)

Citation

DF v. MF (nee Z)
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC17358/2013

Applying the principles of relevance and matrimonial disclosure, the court allowed a number of specific questions in the Wife's 3rd Questionnaire as necessary to ascertain the matrimonial pot (including Q6, Q7, Q8, Q9, Q18 in part, Q24, Q27 and specified questions on the husband's mother's estate subject to an option), ordered production/inspection of management accounts of companies and authorised photographs and valuations of the art collection; refused questions directed to other siblings and the step‑brother as irrelevant; ordered the Husband to answer allowed questions within 28 days and…
11 Dec 2015

CHEUNG TING KAU, VINCENT v. KOO SIU YING AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHEUNG TING KAU, VINCENT v. KOO SIU YING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP4/2011

The court held that the transfer documents (documents relating to share transfers, the SFC waiver and documents concerning the family arrangement) were sufficiently identified, likely to exist and in the possession, custody or power of the plaintiff or the named non-parties, and met the Peruvian Guano relevance and necessity tests; accordingly specific discovery was ordered in respect of those transfer documents (and a non-party disclosure order was granted against named respondents subject to specified deletions), the plaintiff's application relating to lost attendance notes was dismissed, a…
8 Jul 2015

CHUNG PUI TAK AND ANTOHER v. TAM CHI LEUNG NOLAN AND OTHERS

Citation

CHUNG PUI TAK AND ANTOHER v. TAM CHI LEUNG NOLAN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1439/2012

The Subject Document was both relevant and necessary under the Peruvian Guano test to resolve intertwined disputes about how the acquisition of D2 was financed and how the machines were accounted for; the Master Order requiring disclosure was therefore correctly made and should be upheld; the appeal is dismissed and costs follow the event with specified orders on costs.