Ocean More Enterprises Ltd. v. Commercial Union Assurance Co. Plc. and Another and Wan Chung Holdings Ltd. (Third Party)
Read the full judgment text of HCCT 12 of 1997 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 23 June 1999 before The Hon. Mr. Justice Sakhrani in Chambers.
Procedure — Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Specific Discovery — Whether the 2nd Defendant entitled to discovery of correspondence and plans relevant to delay allegations — Court held that documents were directly related to a key issue of delay and should be disclosed. The 2nd Defendant sought production of all correspondence between Plaintiff's architect and the Building Department to determine whether delays were caused by late submission of drawings or by 2nd Defendant's work completion. Affidavit evidence supported the necessity of these documents for expert analysis. The Court ordered specific discovery and reserved costs. The judgment clarifies the procedural right to documents that are material to the issues in construction delay disputes within arbitration proceedings before the High Court.
Legal issues: Order for Specific Discovery
Outcome: Specific discovery order granted to 2nd Defendant; costs of application reserved
Cited by 3 cases
|
HCCT000012B/1997 1997, No. HCCT 12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTRUCTION & ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS NO. 12 OF 1997 ____________
____________ Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Sakhrani in Chambers Date of Hearing: 23 June 1999 Date of Judgment: 23 June 1999 ______________ J U D G M E N T ______________ 1. I am satisfied that the 2nd Defendant is entitled to the order that it seeks for specific discovery of all correspondence between the architects and the Building Department including all submitted drawing/plans. An important issue in these proceedings is whether the 2nd Defendant has delayed completion of the works and if so, to what extent it has delayed the works. 2. The affidavit of Mr. Joseph Wong shows that the 2nd Defendant's expert requires all the correspondence and plans submitted by the Plaintiff's architect to the Building Department, to ascertain whether or not the delay was in fact caused by late submission of drawing and plans by the architect or whether the delay was caused by the 2nd Defendant in the completion of the works. These are documents which relate to the issues in the action and as such they ought to be disclosed. 3. I make an order in the terms of paras. 1 and 2 of the summons dated 11th June 1999. Costs of the application are to be reserved.
Representation: Mr. Simon Wong of Messrs. Kwok & Chu for Plaintiff Mr. Joseph Wong Kin of Messrs. Lee Chan Cheng for 2nd Defendant and Third Party |
Other judgments that cite this case