25 Oct 2004
HONG KONG KAM LAN KOON LTD v. REALRAY INVESTMENTS LTD
- Citation
- HONG KONG KAM LAN KOON LTD v. REALRAY INVESTMENTS LTD
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA15824/1999
The court held that the interlocutory order for examination did not automatically satisfy the requirements of Order 38 Rule 9 at trial; the deposition was admissible under Order 38 Rule 9 against the original Plaintiff because the witness was shown to be unfit to attend trial, but the 2nd Defendant by counterclaim was not bound by the earlier order (not a party to it) so the transcript could not be admitted as deposition against him though it could be admitted as hearsay; limited cross-examination by video-link was permitted for fairness and proportionality.