Discovery applications must specify documents sought and demonstrate their relevance to the case; overly broad requests may be dismissed as fishing expeditions.

Eddie Yeo Soon Chye JC:

[Enclosure 140: Application for Discovery pursuant to Order 24 Rule 7A(2) Rules of Court 2012 and/or Section 7 of Bankers' Book (Evidence) Act 1949]

Background

[1] This is an Application for Discovery by the Plaintiffs against 3rd Parties (Malayan Banking Berhad & HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad) pursuant to O 24 r 7A(2) of the Rules of Court 2012 and/or s 7 of the Bankers'Book (Evidence) Act 1949 (Act 33) for the following orders:

(a) that Malayan Banking Berhad (1st Discovery Defendant) and HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad (2nd Discovery Defendant) do, to the best of their ability after making all reasonable enquiries, answer the questions set out in Schedule A;

(b) that the 1st and 2nd Discovery Defendants do supply to the Plaintiffs'solicitor copies of any and all the following documents in their control in Schedule D in relation to the 1st Acquisition, 2nd Acquisition and 3rd Acquisition;

(c) that the costs of this application shall be borne by the Plaintiffs; and

(d) such other order or relief that this Court deems fit and proper.

[2] The grounds of this Notice of Application are set out in the Affidavit in Support of Muhammad Azraini Bin Abdul Hamid filed in encl 141. The brief grounds in support of this application are as follows:

(a) the Plaintiffs have a bona fide cause of action or claim against the Defendants;

(b) the documents and / or information sought are necessary for the fair and/or efficient disposal of the suit;

(c) the 1st and 2nd Discovery Defendants are likely to have or have had the documents and/or information sought in their possession, custody or power;

(d) the documents and/or information sought are relevant to an issue arising or likely to arise out of the Plaintiffs claim or likely to be made in these proceedings or both;

(e) the Plaintiffs are willing to give an undertaking on the restriction on the use of the documents and/or information disclosed pursuant to this application as set out in Schedule B;

(f) the Plaintiffs are willing to give an undertaking to the Court as set out in Schedule C; and

(g) this is a fit and proper case warranting discovery.

[3] Preceding submissions by parties, the Plaintiffs'counsel informed Court of their intention to narrow the scope of reliefs sought under encl 140 filed as Notes of Submissions (Encl 193) and thereby limiting the reliefs within the span of one year from the date of the respective acquisition as follows:

Prayer 2 (i) (b) and (d): 1st year acquisition from 18 April 2011 - 18 April 2022;

Prayer 2 (ii) (b) and (d): 2nd year acquisition from 25 January 2013 - 25 January 2014;

Prayer 2 (iii) (i) and (k): 3rd year acquisition from 19 August 2013 - 19 August 2014;

Prayer 4 Leave be given to the Plaintiffs to apply for further documents;

and thereto for the 1st and 2nd Discovery Defendants to supply to the Plaintiffs'solicitor copies of the following documents in their control the following:

(a) All cheques drawn on any account at the 1st and 2nd Discovery Defendant in the name of the 1st to 5th Defendants or any of them or to which the 1st to 5th Defendants or any of them are to have been a signatory; and

(b) All statements, credit vouchers, remittance advices and SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) messages relating to any account at the 1st and 2nd Defendants in the name of the 1st to 5th Defendants or any of them are to have been a signatory.

Brief Facts

[4] The Plaintiffs'causes of actions concern inter alia breach of director d