DATO' MOEHAMAD IZAT BIN ACHMAD HABECHI EMIR v 1. ) FERUDDIN EMIR BIN MOEHAMAD IZAT EMIR 2. ) Effendi Amir Bin Moehamad Izat (Nod 17.2.25) 3. ) EMIR EQUITY REFRIGERATIONS SDN BHD

Case Significance

Illustrates the controls on specific discovery under Order 24 rules 7 and 7A of the Rules of Court 2012: a party must identify relevant documents shown to be within the opponent's possession, custody or power and necessary for fair disposal, and the court will refuse an application that amounts to a fishing expedition.

This High Court decision at Kuala Lumpur concerns an application for discovery of documents in a bitterly contested family-and-company dispute involving members of the same family and a company connected to them. The proceedings ran as a main claim and a counterclaim, with several individuals and the company on either side. The application before the court was one by a defendant in the main action, who was also the plaintiff by counterclaim, for the discovery of documents under Order 24 rules 7 and 7A of the Rules of Court 2012. Those rules permit a party to seek specific discovery of identified documents, but only where the documents are relevant, are or have been in the other party's possession, custody or power, and where discovery is necessary for the fair disposal of the matter or for saving costs. The opposing party resisted the application as a fishing expedition — an attempt to trawl for documents in the hope of building a case rather than to obtain identified, relevant material. The court weighed the requirements of relevance, possession, custody and power, and the necessity for fair disposal, against the objection that the application was a fishing expedition. It concluded that the application should not be granted, and dismissed it with costs of RM5,000 to be paid immediately by the applicant to the plaintiff in the main action. Delivered by Judicial Commissioner Eddie Yeo Soon Chye, the judgment is a useful illustration of the controls on specific discovery under Order 24 rules 7 and 7A: a party seeking documents must identify relevant material shown to be within the opponent's possession, custody or power and demonstrate that its production is necessary for the fair disposal of the action, and the court will refuse an application that amounts to a fishing expedition rather than a targeted request for identified documents.