The case concerned a Discovery request directed at the Pohnpei State in a case initiated after the grounding of the M.V. Miyo Maru causing damage to a reef and submerged lands. Most of the information requested concerned the ownership of the damaged reef and land.
The defendant meant that it had no obligation to answer the request. The Court then established that “discovery should be allowed under the "relevancy" standard set forth in Rule 26 "unless it is clear that the information sought can have no possible bearing upon the subject matter of the action."” Most of the information sought by the applicant was deemed relevant by the Court. The Pohnpei State thus had to answer he questions regarding the ownership of the land that it claimed had been damaged by the grounding of the M.V. Miyo Maru. The Pohnpei State also had to state whether it contended that the German or Japanese government had taken physical possession of the submerged reef where the vessel grounded.
The Pohnpei State also had to disclose information on the damage calculation, the legal basis upon which they claim damages and information that supports the existence of the damages. The Court however concluded that the Pohnpei State did not have to answer a question regarding a pure legal conclusion.
The Pohnpei State was ordered to immediately answer the request and pay damages for reasonable expenses. The case also contained third-party complaints, two of which were dismissed.