June 02, 2023 COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE - ORDERS
Claim No. CFI 043/2020
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
BETWEEN
BANK OF BARODA (DIFC BRANCH)
Claimant
and
(1) NEOPHARMA LLC
(2) NMC HEALTHCARE LLC
(3) NEW MEDICAL CENTRE LLC
(4) BAVAGUTHU RAGHURAM SHETTY
Defendants
ORDER OF JUSTICE SIR PETER GROSS
UPON the Case Management Order issued by H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nasser on 17 October 2022 (the “Case Management Order”)
AND UPON the First Defendant’s Application No. CFI-043-2020/12 (“D1’s Application”) and the Fourth Defendant’s Application No. CFI-043-2020/11 (“D4’s Application”) dated 27 March 2023 for document production orders (together the “Document Production Applications”)
AND UPON the Claimant’s evidence in answer to the Document Production Applications, supported by the Witness Statement of Tameem Hashmi dated 18 April 2023
AND UPON D1 and D4’s evidence in reply to the Document Production Applications dated 5 May 2023
AND UPON reviewing the case file
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The documents identified as Redfern Schedule Request (11), exhibited to the Witness Statement (“WS”) of Mr Antonios Dimitracopoulos in D1’s Application shall be produced within 21 days of this Order.
2. The following documents as identified in the WS of Mr. PV Sheheen shall be produced within 21 days of this Order: 1-6, 8, 9-12, 16, 19(i) and 20(a), subject to the Registry notifying the parties of the Court’s approval of the undertakings given pursuant to paragraph 3 below.
3. Production of the documents identified in paragraph 2 above shall be conditional on the provision of satisfactory personal undertakings to the Court from (i) D4, (ii) from an identified individual lawyer representing D4 and (iii) from the expert instructed by D4, confirming that the original documents produced will be safeguarded, preserved and neither lost nor damaged, and (following their examination) returned in their original state. Draft undertakings shall be provided to the Registry for the Registrar’s and the Court’s consideration by 9am GST on Monday 5 June 2023. Production of the original documents need not be given until the Registry has notified the parties of the final version of the undertakings, as approved by the Court.
4. A Case Management Conference shall be listed by the Registry for either Thursday 22 June or Friday 23 June 2023, to be dealt with virtually, with a maximum length of 2 hours, commencing at 12pm GST/9am BST.
5. The parties shall have liberty to apply.
6. Costs for the Document Production Applications shall be costs in the case.
Issued by:
Delvin Sumo
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue 2 June 2023
At: 10am
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
Document Production
1. The question here goes to the relevance or materiality of the documents of which production is sought: RDC, Part 28.28. The ultimate decision on the merits of the underlying issues is for the trial and is (generally at least) not relevant to the question of document production. Much therefore of the Claimant’s objection to production is simply irrelevant.
2. D1 seeks a limited category of documents, identified as Redfern Schedule Request (11), exhibited to the Witness Statement (the “WS”) of Mr Antonios Dimitracopoulos, dated 27 March 2023. Those documents are plainly relevant and material and, unless they have already been produced, there is no basis for not producing them. I order that they be produced within 21 days of the date of this Order.
3. D4 seeks a wider range of documents, as appears from the WS of Mr PV Sheheen, dated 27 March 2023. Given the issue as to the (alleged) forgery of D4’s signature, the application is allowed to the extent of providing the originals of various documents to facilitate their examination by an expert instructed by D4, subject to appropriate individual undertakings being given to the Court (see below). These documents are numbered: 1-6, 8, 9-12, 16, 19(i) and 20(a) in Mr Sheheen’s WS. To such extent, the documents requested are relevant and material and the application is justified.
4. Important warning: It is essential that the original documents sought by D4 are safeguarded, preserved and are neither lost nor damaged after their production. They must of course be returned in their original state following their examination. Production of the original documents will accordingly be conditional on personal undertakings given to the Court by (i) D4; (ii) a named, individual lawyer representing D4 and (iii) the named expert instructed by D4, as to such safeguarding, preservation and (following their examination) return of those original documents. Draft undertakings must be delivered by D4 to the Registry for the Registrar’s and my approval, by 9am GST on Monday 5 June 2023– and the original documents will not need to be produced until the Registry has informed the parties of the final version of the undertakings, as approved by the Court.
5. The additional requests from D4 for documents other than those listed above do not, on balance, satisfy the test for relevance and materiality and the application for their production is refused.
Case Management
6. I have considered the helpful Case Management Order of H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nasser, dated 17 October 2022.
7. A variety of matters are outstanding and require prompt resolution; they cannot be left to the Pre-Trial Review. Therefore, a Case Management Conference shall be listed by the Registry for either Thursday 22 June or Friday 23 June 2023, to be dealt with virtually, with a maximum length of 2 hours, commencing at 12pm GST/9am BST.
8. These outstanding matters are:
(1) The need to finalise the Case Memorandum.
(2) The need to finalise (and shorten) the List of Issues.
(3) The question of whether any amendments to the pleadings are contemplated.
(4) The identity and number of factual witnesses to be called to give evidence at the Trial, and whether it is proposed that they give evidence remotely or in person.
(5) The identity of any expert witnesses the parties propose to call, together with their disciplines. NB: No expert witness will be permitted to give evidence without permission of the Court. Provision will also need to be made for a meeting between the experts identifying areas of agreement and disagreement, before any supplementary reports.
(6) The realistic length of the Trial.
(7) The mode of hearing of the Trial – whether remote, hybrid or in person.