Colombia Bombing Rules Challenged by the Government in Court Appeal

The Court of Appeal has expanded access to documents in judicial review cases, overturning the old relevancy test. A three-judge panel ruled that courts should not reject discovery applications based solely on labeling them as a "fishing expedition." Justice Wong Kian Kheong, writing the decision, clarified that Order 24 Rule 7 of the Rules of Court 2012 now governs discovery procedures.

This test includes the discovery of documents relied upon by either party, those that could harm a party's case, and information that might lead to further inquiries yielding relevant facts. The ruling stems from an appeal by six residents challenging a development order issued for a section of the former Lake Fields mining pool.

They sought six categories of documents, including correspondence between the mayor and developer, bridge plans, and environmental assessments. The High Court had dismissed their request, deeming it a fishing expedition under the old relevancy test. However, the Court of Appeal found three errors in that approach, including reliance on the outdated test.

The residents successfully demonstrated that the documents fell under the categories specified in Order 24, making discovery necessary for a fair judicial review or to save costs. The court emphasized that public authorities, like the mayor, must provide full and fair disclosure of relevant materials. The original High Court order was set aside, allowing the discovery application, with the mayor and developer ordered to pay RM30,000 in costs to the appellants. The case is expected to be heard by the Federal Court soon.