Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Oppressive interrogatories

Legal area

Court

15 Oct 2004

LAW WAI DUEN NINA v. CHAN SHIU CHICK

Citation

LAW WAI DUEN NINA v. CHAN SHIU CHICK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV85/2004

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's discretionary decision to dismiss the second questionnaire as oppressive rather than blue‑penciling it and declined to disturb the judge's costs orders because there was no demonstrable serious error in his case management assessment and because partial success and pre‑hearing offers affected the discretion on costs.
4 May 1981

H v. H

Citation

H v. H
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV195/1980

Fuad J. acted within his judicial discretion in ordering a further affidavit under Rule 73(2); Rule 73(2) and section 7(1) require sufficient particulars of assets and income even for very wealthy parties so that the Court can perform its statutory duty; wealth does not excuse compliance and the appeal is dismissed.
16 Apr 1970

WONG YUE CHOI v. MING PAO DAILY NEWS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG YUE CHOI v. MING PAO DAILY NEWS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1046/1969

The court disallowed the specified interrogatories because they were not sufficiently clear or were oppressive, sought matters of public record that should be obtained by search, amounted to fishing not supported by specific pleadings, or sought opinion or matters not in question under Order 26, and awarded costs of the hearing to the Plaintiff.