Read the full judgment text of HCA 388/2006 on BabelCite. This Court of First Instance judgment was delivered on 10 January 2013 before Hon Au-Yeung J.
Civil procedure – discovery – confidentiality – express undertaking – implied undertaking – non-party discovery – special circumstances – indemnity costs – The court ordered Kingston Financial Group Ltd to make discovery of documents. The plaintiffs were to provide an express undertaking of confidentiality. Kingston sought a further undertaking that any breach would entitle it to seek injunctions and/or damages. The court held that the further undertaking was justified by special circumstances: Kingston was a non-party with no interest in the case, the plaintiffs resided outside the jurisdiction with no known assets in Hong Kong, making contempt proceedings impractical, and the documents were commercially sensitive. The further undertaking was imposed. Costs were ordered on an indemnity basis.
Legal issues: Whether further express undertaking as to confidentiality should be required
Outcome: Further undertaking imposed as proposed by Kingston; extension of time granted to plaintiffs.
Cites 1 case