Plaintiff’s motion for discovery adjourned until he discloses specific documents retained by

Application for discovery - Order 31, rule 12, of the Rules of the Superior Courts - the plaintiff instituted proceedings claiming specific performance of an option agreement and a supplemental option agreement whereby the plaintiff claimed an entitlement to subscribe for 7.5% of each new property development site acquired by the defendants and which it was alleged the agreement incorporated the acquisition through the fourth defendant by the first, second and third defendants, or any of them, of a particular property or in the alternative, damages in addition to or in lieu of specific performance - the defendant issued a plenary summons claiming a breach of an executive employment agreement by the plaintiff - the plaintiff and the defendants both sent letters seeking a number of categories of documents - ten of the original seventeen categories of discovery sought by the plaintiff were still in issue at hearing - whether the documents were relevant and necessary - plaintiff in his application failed to disclose to the court the fact that he had had in his possession for a period of approximately two years, in excess of 100,000 documents, relevant to the issue of discovery and in particular, to the question of the necessity for discover - application adjourned until plaintiff discloses to the court the specific documents retained by him, which he maintains to be relevant to his claim and/or defence to the counterclaim - whether documents sought by defendant were relevant and necessary - documents relating to the plaintiff's "belief" were not relevant and necessary as only a claim should be in a pleading - defendant is given liberty to bring a motion to seek out claims relating to a belief if the plaintiff does not amend or withdraw them - court orders discovery of 3 categories of documents - court retains seisin of the case.