Production of documents

Vitol SA v Capri Marine Ltd QBD [2008] EWHC 378 (Comm) 29 February

An order made under Civil Procedure Rule 71.2 against an officer of a corporate judgment debtor resident abroad requiring him to attend court for questioning and to produce documents, is not an order made against the judgment debtor itself. Therefore the position is not analogous with an order for an affidavit verifying specific disclosure, which was directed to the company itself, but required it to comply by procuring one of its officers to make the required affidavit. Nor does r6.30(2) provide the court with machinery pursuant to which it could permit service out of the jurisdiction of an order made under r71.2(1)(b). Rule 6.30(2) requires the identification of a ground within r6.20 which gives the court power to grant permission to serve out and there is no such ground in respect of an order or an application for an order under r71.2(1)(b). The closest analogy is with a witness summons and it is axiomatic that a party cannot compel a witness in a foreign country to attend a trial in England.