Read the full judgment text of HCCT20/2009 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 16 December 2011 before Deputy High Court Judge Au-Yeung.
Construction arbitration proceedings — discovery application — Plaintiff seeks un-redacted versions of Main Contract Final Account, Main Contract volumes, and sub-contract interim payment certificates — Defendant provides redacted versions citing confidentiality and irrelevance — dispute centers on assessment of quantum under Sub-Contract, whether oral or letter governed — court holds relevance test governed by pleadings, no alternative claim relying on Defendant’s Sub-Contract version, no contemporaneous claim or assessment by Engineer — documents form fishing expedition — expert evidence does not require these documents — Defendant’s averments on oath uncontroverted — Plaintiff's application dismissed. Costs to be assessed on summary basis. The decision clarifies application of relevance in discovery in construction claims where contractual terms and claims disputed, limiting discovery where pleadings do not support reliance on such documents.
Legal issues: Relevance of un-redacted documents to pleaded issues · Whether Plaintiff's request constitutes a fishing expedition · Requirement of documents for expert opinion · Relevance of Shu Kee’s sub-contract interim payment certificate no. 32
Outcome: Plaintiff's summons for specific discovery of un-redacted documents dismissed