HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
AHMAD ZAHRI MIRZA – Appellant
Versus
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS CAPITAL SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. scope of pre-action discovery and relevant legal standards. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of shareholding and agreements impacting the claim. (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 3. requirements for establishing a viable claim and document relevance. (Para 23 , 25 , 30) |
| 4. final court order on payment and discovery of valuation report. (Para 75) |
[1] Pre-trial discovery is common between parties to an action that has already begun. It is less usual if the discovery is before the commencement of proceedings. It is even rarer still if the discovery is pre-action against non-parties to an intended action. The case of Norwich Pharmacal Co v. Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133, was the watershed setting out the circumstances under which a pre-action discovery application may be made confining itself mainly to situations where it would be nigh impossible to commence an action against unknown defendants; unknown to the plaintiff but known to the party against whom a pre-action discovery is sought. As was observed by the Court of Appeal in Nishimatsu Construction Co Ltd v. Kecom Sdn Bhd; at p 103 [2009] 2 MLJ 404; [2008] 6 CLJ 149:
"Save in the circumstances set out i
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.