Skyforce Engineering & Management Co. Ltd. v. Wan Chung Construction Co. Ltd.

Case No.HCCT45/99

Court

高等法院原訟法庭

Date09 Jun 1999

JudgeThe Hon. Mr. Justice Sakhrani

Case Document

100%

HCCT000045/1999

HCCT45/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTRUCTION AND ARBITRATION LIST NO. 45 OF 1999

____________

BETWEEN
	SKYFORCE ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED	Plaintiff

	AND

	WAN CHUNG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED	Defendant

____________

Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Sakhrani in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 9 June 1999

Date of Judgment: 9 June 1999

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

1. This is an application by the Plaintiff for specific discovery by summons dated 1st June 1999. I am of the view that this application has been made prematurely. The Amended Statement of Claim was only amended on 4th June 1999 pursuant to an order of Findlay J. on 31st May 1999. The Defendant was given 28 days to file and serve an Amended Defence and Counterclaim. That time has not yet expired. Pleadings have not closed. It is premature at this stage to seek specific discovery of documents without knowing what issues are going to be raised by the amendment. I am told by counsel for the Defendant that there will be substantial amendments to the Defence and Counterclaim. The Plaintiff should wait until pleadings are closed before launching their application for specific discovery.

2. Further, the Plaintiff has issued an O. 14 summons seeking final judgment for the specific amount claimed in the Amended Statement of Claim. It is for the specific sum of $12,982,667.93, interest and costs as claimed in the Amended Statement of Claim. If the Plaintiff succeeds on the O. 14 application and obtains judgment as sought, that is an end to the Plaintiff's claim for the said specific sum claimed in the Amended Statement of Claim. The Amended Statement of Claim in its present form does not seek to claim any further sums of money whether specified or unspecified.

3. In my judgment, the application has been made prematurely and should be dismissed. Costs of the application to the Defendant in any event.

	(Arjan H. Sakhrani)
	Judge of the Court of First Instance

Representation:

Mr. Anthony Leung of M/s Siao, Wen & Leung for Plaintiff

Mr. Ronald Tang instructed by M/s Lee Chan Cheng for Defendant