Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

[1] These appeals, which were heard together, arise in the following way. The learned Judge in the Court below was in the process of recording evidence that is proposed to be used in criminal proceedings in Hong Kong. He was acting pursuant to an order made under O 66 and O 39 of the Rules of the High , 1980, upon letters of request issued by the Supreme Court of Hong Kong. In the midst of carrying out that task, he was required to deal with a summons taken out by the first, second and third respondents asking for certain declarations. I will say more about this in a moment.

[2] The first and second respondents are officers of the third respondent bank. They are potential witnesses in the proceedings before the learned Judge. They have also expressed their willingness to give evidence before the Court in Hong Kong. But they and their employer were concerned about the resultant implications of giving evidence. They genuinely entertain a fear that by doing so they may be prosecuted for offences under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act, 1989, or "BAFIA', as that Act is commonly referred to. They are also concerned that they may become liable civilly in