Byju’s Alpha, Inc v OCI Limited & Ors

A letter of request under the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 must seek evidence directed to facts alleged in the requesting proceedings. It cannot principally obtain information enabling a claimant to identify facts or formulate new claims. Comity is important, but the English court may examine the request in context. A request may be oppressive where compliance would compel prospective defendants to assist in formulating claims against themselves. Documents must be identified specifically, not by broad categories.

Alpha, the plaintiff in fraud proceedings in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, obtained a letter of request seeking documents and sworn testimony from OCI and two individuals. Senior Master Cook gave effect to it by an order dated 11 July 2024. The respondents applied to set that order aside.

The issues were whether the request sought evidence for the Delaware trial or impermissible pre-trial discovery, whether the document requests were sufficiently specific, and whether compliance would be oppressive.

1. Outcome. The application was allowed. The 11 July 2024 order was set aside and Alpha’s application under CPR 34.17 was dismissed.
2. Comity required substantial deference to Judge Dorsey’s views, particularly in an international fraud case. However, the assessment was fact-specific. The court could examine the substance of the request because it had been made on paper in terms prepared by Alpha’s lawyers and did not demonstrate compliance with the statutory limits.
3. The request principally sought information about transactions which were not pleaded in the Second Amended Complaint. Its purpose was to enable Alpha to understand transactions, trace funds and formulate possible claims, rather than obtain evidence proving pleaded facts. It was therefore outside the statutory jurisdiction.
4. Compliance would also be oppressive. The respondents would be compelled under threat of committal to provide evidence from which Alpha could formulate fraud claims against them before knowing the case to be brought.
5. The document requests sought broad classes and “all documents and communications” within them. They failed to identify particular documents. The defects could not be cured by blue pencilling or by substituting a later open offer.

The judgment records no appeal. It concerned an application to set aside an order made by Senior Master Cook on 11 July 2024 giving effect to the letter of request.