Anton Piller Orders - ghngfntg PDF

Preview

Summary

ghngfntg...

Description

ANTON PILLER ORDERS 

Prevent removal/destruction of evidence before an inter partes (between parties) application.

Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Ltd

 

 1. 2. 3. 4.

o If defendant is informed, the vital evidence might be destroyed so justice will be defeated. o Orders defendant to give permission to plaintiff to enter premises to inspect documents and take it from premises Failure to meet order, the person will be guilty of contempt. Halsbury Laws of Malaysia – Jurisdiction of high court to require defendant to permit access to his premises to look for evidence. Ex parte without informing defendant authorising strong prima facie evidence. Elements for successful application of Anton Piller Order: Extremely strong prima facie case Very serious potential or actual damage to the plaintiff Clear evidence that the defendant in possession of the incriminating materials Real possibility that defendant may destroy the materials

Universal Thermosensors Ltd v Hibben; Arthur Anderson & Co v Interfood Sdn Bhd (this order can be abused. Further requirements when granting the order) o The order must normally contain a term that before complying with the order, the defendant may obtain legal advice o The execution of the orders is restricted to working days and normal working hours (unless not appropriate to the facts of the case). o The order cannot restrict the defendant from communicating with a legal advisor, but may contain an injunction to restrain the defendant from informing others about the order (for an appropriate amount of time). o The order should not be executed at business premises without the presence of a responsible officer or representative of the business, except where there are good reasons to do otherwise. o The order should expressly require a detailed list of the items being removed prepared at the premises before the removal and the defendant should be given an opportunity to check the list (unless seriously impracticable). o The order when executed, at a private house where a woman may be in the house alone, be accompanied by a woman. o The court should consider in implementing in its order that:  The execution of the order be supervised be a solicitor not from the firm representing the plaintiff.  The said solicitor be suitably experienced in the execution Anton Piller Orders  The said solicitor prepare a written report as to what transpired in the execution of the order  A copy of the report be given to the defendant  The plaintiff is to present the report in the inter partes hearing

Universal Thermosensors Ltd v Hibben o Judges should make serious consideration to the desirability when providing the order, solicitor should prepare written report on the execution with copy served on the defendant and report should be put before inter partes hearing. Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn Bhd v Cahaya Surya Buku dan Alat Tulis o Court displayed less strict approach in copyright infringement complaint, suspicion followed by a successful trap purchase supported by prima facie evidence of ownership in the copyright is sufficient to justify asking for being given an Anton Piller order despite fact that plaintiff had already obtained infringing copies of books from defendant’s premises....