articles | 09 September 2019 | Soteris Pittas & Co LLC

CYPRUS: Useful guidance for Cypriot courts as to their jurisdiction to control the manner in which a Party obtains evidence to support its case

In the English case SOUTH CAROLINA INSURANCE CO -V- ASSURANCE MAATSCHAPPIJ “DE ZEVEN PROVINCIEN NV (1987), the defendants to an English Action sought an order for production of documents under Section 1782 from a Court in the United States.

The English Claimants sought an injunction to restrain the pursuit of the above application which succeeded before the English 1st Instant Court and the Court of Appeal, but the injunction granted was set aside by the House of Lords.

In the above case, the House of Lord held inter alia that the English Court would not in general seek to control the manner, in which a party obtained evidence, provided that the means by which it did so, were lawful in the country where they were used.

In another English case OMEGA GROUP HOLDINGS LTD -V- KOZNEY (2002), has been held that it would be unconscionable and would constitute an interference with due process of the English Court for the defendant to pursue the Section 1782 application in United States for the deposition of witnesses, whom the claimant intended to call to give oral evidence in the English proceedings (i.e. risks of having witnesses been subjected to unwarranted double cross-examination).

The above English case law provide useful guidance to Cypriot Courts, when face with similar legal issues and requests for issue of injunctive relief.

Cooperation Partners
  • Logo for Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry
  • Logo for CYFA Cyprus
  • Logo for Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism
  • Logo for Cyprus International Businesses Association
  • Logo for Cyprus In Your Heart
  • Logo for Invest Cyprus
  • Logo for Cyprus Investment Funds Association
  • Logo for Cyprus Shipping Chamber
  • Logo for Association of Cyprus Banks