Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. v Insurco International Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judge: Mr. Justice McCracken
• Judgment Date: 03 April 1995
• Neutral Citation: 1995 WJSC-HC 1695
• Docket Number: No. 2 FTE/1994
• Date: 03 April 1995

VOLUNTARY PURCHASING GROUPS INC v. INSURCO INTERNATIONAL LTD

IN THE MATTER OF THE FOREIGN TRIBUNALS EVIDENCE ACT, 1856

AND IN A CIVIL MATTER NOW IN A DISTRICT COURT IN THE UNITED

STATES FOR TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, 141ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

BETWEEN

VOLUNTARY PURCHASING GROUPS INC

PLAINTIFF

AND

INSURCO INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND AGRICHEM LIMITED

DEFENDANTS

1995 WJSC-HC 1695

No. 2 FTE/1994

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

HIGH COURT

Jurisdiction

Inherence - Order - Procurement - Application - Ex parte - Order set aside - (1994/2 Fte - McCracken J. - 3/4/95) [1995] 2 ILRM 145

|Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. v. Insurco International

Ltd.|

ORDER

Cancellation

Grounds - Basis - Alteration - Events - Discovery - High Court - Inherent jurisdiction to set aside order obtained on ~ex parte~ application - (1994/2 Fte - McCracken J. - 3/4/95) [1995] 2 ILRM 145

|Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. v. Insurco International

Ltd.|

PRACTICE

Order

Ex parte - Annulment - High Court - Jurisdiction - Inherence - Foreign tribunal - Tribunal's ex parte application that evidence be taken by High Court - Order granted request - Foreign tribunal's judgment reversed on appeal - Application and order nugatory - Whether order should be set aside with costs - Rules of the Superior Courts, 1986, order 39, r. 39; order 52, r. 3 - Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act, 1856, s. 2 - (1994/2 Fte - Mc Cracken J. - 3/4/95) - [1995] 2 ILRM 145

|Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. v. Insurco International

Ltd.|

Citations:

FOREIGN TRIBUNALS EVIDENCE ACT 1856 S1

RSC O.39 r39

RSC O.39 r40

RSC O.39 r41

RSC O.39 r42

RSC O.39 r43

RSC O.39 r44

BOEING CO V PPG INDUSTRIES INC 1988 3 AER 839

FOREIGN TRIBUNALS EVIDENCE ACT 1856 S5

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice McCracken delivered on the 3rd day of April 1995.

2 On 17th January, 1994, Mr. Justice Flood made an Order pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act, 1856 that a representative or representatives of KPMG Stokes Kennedy Crowley should attend before an Examiner to give evidence in the civil matter referred to above. This Order was made pursuant to a request from the Tarrant County District Court in Texas, United States of America. It appears that the Plaintiff had obtained a default judgment against the Defendants in that Court, and the request was made in aid of execution of the judgment, rather than by way of obtaining evidence for the substantive action. Both the Defendant and KPMG Stokes Kennedy Crowley applied to the Court to set aside the Order of 17th January, 1994. There were a number of grounds upon which these applications were brought, but I am not concerned with the merits of either application, other than with the fact that one of the grounds was that the default judgment of the Tarrant County District Court was under appeal at the time the application was made under the 1856 Act. In fact, the default judgment has subsequently been set aside, and it is agreed by the parties that the Order of Mr. Justice Flood no longer has any effect. The only issue before me is whether I should award the Applicants in their respective applications their costs.

3 The primary issue before me is whether either of the Applicants are entitled to apply to set aside the Order. Section 1 of the 1856 Act provides for the making of the Order, but makes no provision for any further Court applications...