This is an AI-generated summary of a selected monitored public legal source and may omit context. It is general information only, not legal advice, and is not a substitute for reading the source or consulting an attorney.
AI summary
The High Court considered an application about a Rule 35(3) notice in the Directech and Kawasaki litigation. The court found the notice overbroad and vague, dismissed the compliance application save for a request that the plaintiff undertake further overseas investigations, and postponed the trial sine die. The judgment also dealt with costs.
This appears to concern Rule 35(3) discovery requests and costs orders in ongoing commercial litigation.
Evidence from source
Save for the order in paragraph 1 above, the defendant’s application for compliance with Rule 35(3) is dismissed.
Supports: Summary sentence 2: the compliance application was dismissed save for the overseas investigations request.
The trial under case number 2021/8507 is postponed sine die .
Supports: Summary sentence 2: the trial was postponed sine die.