Court directs the filing of affidavit of discovery in specific performance action

Discovery – further and better discovery – appeal from High Court order refusing further and better discovery – claim for specific performance of an alleged contract for the hire of motor vans - application for further and better discovery - three additional categories of discovery sought in motion - a reasonable suspicion that the party who had already made an affidavit had other documents relating to the matters in question in his possession - failed to discharge this burden – bare assertion – additional jurisdiction to order discovery – rules exhaustively defines the circumstances in which additional discovery can be directed after orders for discovery have been agreed or made in an action - some good reason must be given for revisiting that agreement or order – no reason in these proceedings – privilege -scheduling of the privileged documents - require an individual listing of the documents with the general classification of privilege claimed in respect of each document indicated in such fashion as would convey to a reader of the affidavit the general nature of the document concerned in each individual case together with the broad heading of privilege being claimed for it - second schedule to the affidavit of discovery - deponent must identify the documents which they have had, but have not now – extent of the duty - failed to comply with the clear obligation on the face of the Rules to (a) record that they once had the documents in the second schedule, (b) stating when they had the documents, (c) stating what has become of the documents and (d) confirming that they never had any other documents within the discovery obligation – supplemental affidavit - respondents should now be directed to deliver a single, composite, new affidavit of discovery listing each document in each category which they are discovering, each document which they say they once had but no longer have, listing each privileged document and otherwise in full compliance with the Rules of the Superior Courts – new affidavit to deal properly with privilege - ensure that the respondents in delivering their affidavit of discovery have a full and complete understanding of which of these documents may once have been in the possession of the respondents - properly addresses the contents of the second schedule but must explain the precise steps they have taken to ascertain what documents within the categories the respondents once had but no longer have – application for further and better discovery refused – affidavits of discovery provided are deficient – privilege not dealt with appropriately - first affidavit failed to deal with the issue of what documents they previously had but no longer have that fall within the discovery agreement, taking account of the manner in which this issue is now addressed in the second affidavit and the absence of any averment that any investigation has been undertaken by the respondents to address whether documents of the kind referred to have existed in the past but are no longer in existence, combined with the absence of any clear explanation - appropriate for the respondents to file a single composite affidavit of discovery in full compliance in all respects with the Rules of the Superior Courts - precise steps they have taken to ascertain what documents within the categories the subject of this application, the respondents once had but no longer have –