Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Possession custody and power

Legal area

Court

18 Oct 2016

IP PUI LAM ARTHUR AND ANOTHER v. ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

IP PUI LAM ARTHUR AND ANOTHER v. ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP450/2016

The court held the Order of 18 March 2015 was clear in context; the documents identified in the 2nd Schedule existed; on the evidence (including the defendants’ own statements and factual findings in related partnership litigation) the defendants had possession, custody or the power to obtain the bulk of the documents and failed to produce them or to give cogent explanations; their non‑compliance was deliberate and constituted contempt beyond reasonable doubt; defendants convicted and remitted for sentence, admitted to bail on specified deposits.
29 Aug 2008

PAI CHIN MING v. LUO XIAO AND OTHERS

Citation

PAI CHIN MING v. LUO XIAO AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2693/2006

The application was dismissed in part because the court found on the balance of evidence that the bank statements/cheque copies showing payment did not exist or, alternatively, were not relevant as pleadings acknowledged receipt not payment; for documents relating to the Purported 2000 Agreement and HCA 654/2006, although existence and relevancy were not disputed, the defendants swore they did not have possession custody or power of them and there is no jurisdiction to compel them to obtain such documents from third parties, so the court lacked jurisdiction to order discovery and in the exerc…
5 Jul 2002

WENDER ENGINEERING SERVICE CO. LTD. v. TECHNIC CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation

WENDER ENGINEERING SERVICE CO. LTD. v. TECHNIC CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT120/1997

The plaintiff established prima facie relevance and prima facie possession custody and power in respect of the categories sought; accordingly the 1st defendant is ordered to disclose the documents in the revised Schedule (including paragraph 14), and the defendant's assertions that documents do not exist or have been provided must be verified on oath.
11 May 1998

LAM SHU CHIU v. CHAN KWONG WING

Citation

LAM SHU CHIU v. CHAN KWONG WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA6789/1997

The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant had possession, custody or an enforceable power to produce Polytrade's audited reports and did not establish that Polytrade was the defendant's alter ego or that the audited reports would be sufficiently relevant; therefore the order for specific discovery was unjustified and must be set aside.
17 Apr 1996

KRISTAN BOWERS PHILLIPS v. INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

KRISTAN BOWERS PHILLIPS v. INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3978/1990

The summons for specific discovery was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of relevance and necessity against Ciba-Geigy: the materials sought were overbroad as to documents, entities and time period; Ciba-Geigy was not shown to be the manufacturer or to have the requisite state of knowledge about the product manufactured by Nippon; documents referenced appeared possibly generated by third parties (Exxon, Nippon) and not demonstrably within Ciba-Geigy's possession, custody or power, making the discovery request disproportionate and insufficiently specific.

Hong Kong Case Law

IP PUI LAM ARTHUR AND ANOTHER v. ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG AND ANOTHER

PAI CHIN MING v. LUO XIAO AND OTHERS

WENDER ENGINEERING SERVICE CO. LTD. v. TECHNIC CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

LAM SHU CHIU v. CHAN KWONG WING

KRISTAN BOWERS PHILLIPS v. INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD AND OTHERS