JUDGMENT

[1] The appellant, who was the plaintiff in the suit filed in the High Court, has been granted by this court leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal which overturned that of the High Court in respect of two interlocutory applications heard by the learned High Court Judge. The respondents were the appellant's former directors and were sued by the appellant together with a company, PT Anglo Slavic Utama ("PT Anglo"), who was named the 1st defendant in the suit and who was allegedly under the respondents' control. The 1st defendant was also a substantial shareholder of the appellant. The claim against them was premised on an alleged conspiracy by all three of them to defraud the appellant and as against the respondents it was also grounded on breaches of thei

The Applications

[2] I have made a conscious decision to summarily state the rudimentary background facts above, for given the nature of the leave questions granted to the appellant to appeal to this court, these are sufficient to understand the legal dispute now troubling the parties. As stated above, the dispute centers on the two applications filed by the appellant which are inter-related. The first, encl 307, on pre-trial discovery of documents, was made pursuant to s 6 and/or s 7 of Bankers' Books (Evidence) Act 1949 ("the Act") and/ or O 92 r 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 ("ROC 2012"). The order sought under this application was for the app