1. ) ALUPANORAMA METALS SDN BHD 2. ) AM METALS SERVICES CENTRE SDN BHD 1. ) OKAYA INTERNATIONAL (H.K.) LTD 2. ) GUANDONG GUANG XIN INVESTMENT HOLDINGS CO. LTD 3. ) Guang Dong Yue Xin Asset Management Co. Ltd 4. ) Yip Kwong Nin (Juga Dikenal
The discovery application was dismissed because the bulk of the documents sought were not shown to be relevant to the disputes between the 1st Plaintiff and 1st Defendant, included periods outside the 1st Defendant's involvement, were overly wide and oppressive and therefore not necessary for disposing fairly of the cause or saving costs.
- Citation
- BA-22NCC-109-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff: ALUPANORAMA METALS SDN BHD; 2nd Plaintiff: AM METALS SERVICES CENTRE SDN BHD; 1st Defendant: OKAYA INTERNATIONAL (H.K) Ltd; 2nd Defendant: GUANDONG GUANG XIN INVESTMENT HOLDINGS CO. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 5 September 2022
- Case Number
- BA-22NCC-109-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Writ of Summons (discovery Application) / Interlocutory Discovery Application Heard and Dismissed
- Outcome
- 1st Defendant's discovery application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Discovery Orders, Relevance of Documents, Possession Custody or Power, Fishing Expedition, Court Discretion Under Rules of Court 2012
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ALUPANORAMA METALS SDN BHD
1st Plaintiff
AM METALS SERVICES CENTRE SDN BHD
2nd Plaintiff
OKAYA INTERNATIONAL (H.K) Ltd
1st Defendant
GUANDONG GUANG XIN INVESTMENT HOLDINGS CO. Ltd
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Writ of Summons (discovery Application) / Interlocutory Discovery Application Heard and Dismissed
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether documents between 1st Plaintiff and 2nd Defendant for periods before and after 1st Defendant's involvement are relevant to disputes between 1st Plaintiff and 1st Defendant
- 2 Whether discovery sought is necessary for disposing fairly of the cause or matter
- 3 Whether the scope and temporal range of requested documents amount to an impermissible fishing expedition
Ratio Decidendi
The discovery application was dismissed because the bulk of the documents sought were not shown to be relevant to the disputes between the 1st Plaintiff and 1st Defendant, included periods outside the 1st Defendant's involvement, were overly wide and oppressive and therefore not necessary for disposing fairly of the cause or saving costs.
Court Disposition
1st Defendant's discovery application dismissed
Orders
- The 1st Defendant's application for discovery of documents listed in paragraphs 1(a) to (e) is dismissed
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment