57 lines
2.7 KiB
YAML
57 lines
2.7 KiB
YAML
plaintiff:
|
|
- COMPETITION COMMISSION
|
|
defendant:
|
|
- LINDE HKO LIMITED
|
|
- TSE CHUN WAH
|
|
- LINDE GMBH
|
|
jurisdiction_code: HKCT
|
|
jurisdiction_name: Competition Tribunal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
|
|
case_location:
|
|
- 香港特別行政區
|
|
- Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
|
|
case_reason: >-
|
|
The Competition Commission seeks orders for the Respondents to make general discovery of documents relevant
|
|
to the enforcement action brought against them.
|
|
case_object:
|
|
- discovery and production of documents
|
|
judgment_result:
|
|
- charge: Application for discovery and production of documents (liability issue)
|
|
result: Declined. The application was not properly formulated as a consequence of which the Tribunal
|
|
declined to make an order for the Respondents to make discovery at this time.
|
|
judgment_summary: >-
|
|
The Competition Commission sought orders for Linde HKO Limited, Tse Chun Wah, and Linde Gmbh to make
|
|
general discovery of relevant documents in an enforcement action. The court declined the application
|
|
as it was not properly formulated according to Rule 24 of the Competition Tribunal Rules, which requires
|
|
a summons be filed. The tribunal noted that while the Commission can make broad discovery, this must
|
|
be requested through proper procedure.
|
|
involved_entities:
|
|
- entity_name: Hon Harris J
|
|
reason: Presiding judge in this case, responsible for fact-finding and adjudication.
|
|
- entity_name: Competition Commission
|
|
reason: Applicant in the enforcement action.
|
|
- entity_name: Linde HKO Limited
|
|
reason: 1st Respondent in the enforcement action.
|
|
- entity_name: TSE CHUN WAH
|
|
reason: 2nd Respondent in the enforcement action.
|
|
- entity_name: Linde GMBH
|
|
reason: 3rd Respondent in the enforcement action.
|
|
- entity_name: Jonathan Harris
|
|
reason: President of the Competition Tribunal, articulated procedural principles regarding discovery
|
|
and production of documents.
|
|
- entity_name: Mr Jin Pao SC
|
|
reason: Counsel representing the applicant (Competition Commission).
|
|
- entity_name: Mr Timothy Parker
|
|
reason: Barrister representing the applicant (Competition Commission).
|
|
- entity_name: Ms Eva Sit SC
|
|
reason: Counsel representing the 1st respondent (Linde HKO Limited).
|
|
- entity_name: Mr Joshua Chan
|
|
reason: Barrister representing the 1st respondent (Linde HKO Limited).
|
|
- entity_name: Mr Nigel Francis
|
|
reason: Counsel representing the 2nd respondent (TSE CHUN WAH).
|
|
- entity_name: Linklaters
|
|
reason: Law firm instructing Ms Eva Sit SC and Mr Joshua Chan for the 1st respondent.
|
|
- entity_name: YTL LLP
|
|
reason: Law firm instructing Mr Carter Chim for the 3rd respondent (Linde GMBH).
|
|
- entity_name: Eversheds Sutherland
|
|
reason: Law firm instructing Mr Jin Pao SC and Mr Timothy Parker for the applicant.
|