A A
B B
HCCT 21/2014
C C
D IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E E
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
F CONSTRUCTION AND ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS F
NO 21 OF 2014
G G
____________
H H
BETWEEN
I I
J HAPPY DYNASTY HOLDINGS LIMITED Plaintiff J
K and K
L CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION L
ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LIMITED Defendant
M M
N
____________
N
O O
Before: Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers (Open to public)
P
Date of Hearing: 21 May 2015 P
Q
Date of Decision: 21 May 2015
Q
R
_____________
R
DECISION
S _____________ S
T T
U U
V V
A -2- A
B B
1. I will be very brief in my decision.
C C
2. Having heard submissions from counsel, for which I thank
D D
them, the only real issue for determination at trial is whether or not there
E was a binding agreement made between the parties as a result of the E
meeting and the email of 27 June. It is not in dispute that the
F F
subcontracts in question were not awarded to the plaintiff. If there was a
G binding agreement, the defendant was in breach in awarding the G
subcontracts to a third party. Why it did so is irrelevant to the question of
H H
breach. I am not satisfied that the documents sought by the plaintiff are
I necessary for the determination of this main issue at trial, of whether or I
not there was an agreement made.
J J
K 3. I am not satisfied that the documents identified in items 2 K
and 3 of the Schedule to the summons are relevant to the matters in
L L
question. Documents which relate purely to credit, and to impeach the
M credit or credibility of the opposing party will not be ordered. M
N N
4. Even if the documents identified in the Schedule can, in any
O way, be said to be relevant in the wide Peruvian sense, I am not satisfied, O
in view of the pleadings, the issues which are in dispute, and the
P P
discovery already made by the defendant, that they are necessary either
Q for disposing fairly of the cause, or for saving costs. Q
R R
5. Post CJR, discovery should be aimed and restricted to
S S
facilitate an effective trial of the matter without unnecessary costs. On
T T
U U
V V
A -3- A
B B
the ground of necessity, I would refuse this application, with costs to the
C defendant. C
D D
E E
F F
G G
(Mimmie Chan)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
H High Court H
I I
J J
K
Mr Nicholas Cooney, SC, instructed by Stephenson Harwood,
K
for the plaintiff
L L
Mr Paul Lam, SC, instructed by J Chan, Yip, So & Partners,
for the defendant
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V