Read the full judgment text of HCA 3246/2016 on BabelCite. This Court of First Instance judgment was delivered on 14 November 2018 before Wilson Chan J.
Civil procedure – expert evidence – application for leave to adduce expert evidence – late application made after trial commenced – whether plaintiff justified in delaying application – principles governing late applications and expert evidence – alleged breach of trust by trustee regarding shares in Great Eagle Holdings Limited – plaintiff alleged Lo Family Trust had controlling shareholding with premium value under threat from KS Lo's increased shareholding – defendant trustee refused to acquire more shares – whether proposed expert issues on corporate finance, shareholding control, premium value, and applicability of Takeovers Code and Listing Rules are proper subjects of expert evidence – whether application should be dismissed for lateness alone – whether proposed expert issues are connected to pleaded issues – whether allowing application would disrupt milestone trial timetable – court dismissed P's Summonses on grounds of (1) serious and unjustified delay, (2) significant disruption to trial timetable and serious prejudice to defendant, and (3) some proposed expert issues not proper subjects of expert evidence, unclear in scope, or not connected with pleaded issues – plaintiff could and should have sought expert evidence well before trial commencement – expert issues related to matters pleaded since 18 July 2017 – defendant's consequential amendments did not raise new issues – plaintiff previously argued controlling shareholding and premium value provable by common sense and common knowledge – Issue 1 involved factual matters not requiring expert evidence – Issue 4 too wide-ranging requiring extensive factual investigation – at least three months would be needed for expert evidence process – trial dates in November 2018 would be wasted – significant number of additional dates would be required – court order for speedy trial made on 11 September 2017 would be undermined – applications dismissed.
Legal issues: Whether the plaintiff's application for leave to adduce expert evidence should be dismissed on the basis of lateness · Whether the proposed expert issues are proper subjects of expert evidence and connected to pleaded issues · Whether allowing the late application would cause significant disruption to the trial timetable and prejudice to the defendant
Outcome: Plaintiff's summonses to adduce expert evidence dismissed.
Cited by 20 cases · Cites 10 cases