MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN BHD MALAYSIAN BANKING BERHAD & DUA LAGI

MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN BHD MALAYSIAN BANKING BERHAD & DUA LAGI

The court ordered production of the appendices to the Plaintiff's Expert Report referred to and exhibited in the Plaintiff's affidavit because they fall within Order 24 rule 10 and are necessary for fair disposal; the voluminous nature of the documents is not a valid refusal ground; the expert's native files were not covered by the Notice to Produce and, although potentially relevant under O24 r11, are not necessary for fair disposal of this interlocutory OS and thus need not be produced now.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-28-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN BHD; First Defendant: MALAYSIAN BANKING BERHAD; Second Defendant: MAYBANK INVESTMENT BANK BERHAD; Third Defendant: DAMAI CITY SDN BHD
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 November 2020
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-28-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (arbitration) / Interlocutory Application for Discovery and Production of Documents; Grounds of Decision
Outcome
Application partially allowed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Discovery and Production of Documents, Performance Bond, Expert Evidence, Fraud and Unconscionability
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Arbitration Civil Procedure Banking and Securities Law Interlocutory Injunction Discovery and Production of Documents Performance Bond Expert Evidence +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN BHD

Plaintiff

MALAYSIAN BANKING BERHAD

First Defendant

MAYBANK INVESTMENT BANK BERHAD

Second Defendant

DAMAI CITY SDN BHD

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (arbitration) / Interlocutory Application for Discovery and Production of Documents; Grounds of Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents referred to in affidavits/pleadings must be produced
  2. 2 Whether voluminous nature of documents is a ground to refuse production
  3. 3 Whether expert native files must be produced where not specified in notice to produce

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered production of the appendices to the Plaintiff's Expert Report referred to and exhibited in the Plaintiff's affidavit because they fall within Order 24 rule 10 and are necessary for fair disposal; the voluminous nature of the documents is not a valid refusal ground; the expert's native files were not covered by the Notice to Produce and, although potentially relevant under O24 r11, are not necessary for fair disposal of this interlocutory OS and thus need not be produced now.

Court Disposition

Application partially allowed

Orders

  • Plaintiff shall produce and deliver to the Third Defendant the documents sought in paragraph (2)(i) of the Application (all appendices to the Plaintiff's Expert Report exhibited as Exhibit "TFT-26") by 11 November 2020
  • No order for production of the Expert's Native Files (paragraph (2)(ii))