C.C.C.Y. v. C.W.L.

C.C.C.Y. v. C.W.L.

Evidence, including admissions, contemporaneous correspondence and expert opinion, established the husband was incapable of consummating the marriage at the material times and remained so quoad hanc; the incapacity was not wilful refusal; the petitioner had not led the respondent to believe she would not seek...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
C.C.C.Y. v. C.W.L.
Parties
Petitioner (wife): C.C.C.Y.; Respondent (husband): C.W.L.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 March 1980
Case Number
HCMC25/1979
Procedural Posture
Divorce and Nullity Proceedings (high Court, Divorce Jurisdiction) / Judgment Following Trial
Outcome
Decree of nullity granted in favour of the petitioner; respondent's cross-petition for divorce dismissed
Legal Topics
Consummation, Impotence, Nullity, Irretrievable Breakdown, Unreasonable Behaviour, Desertion, Estoppel/section 20(3)
Source Language
en
Family Law Matrimonial Law Nullity of Marriage Divorce Consummation Impotence Nullity Irretrievable Breakdown +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.C.C.Y.

Petitioner (wife)

C.W.L.

Respondent (husband)

Procedural Posture

Divorce and Nullity Proceedings (high Court, Divorce Jurisdiction) / Judgment Following Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-consummation was due to wilful refusal or incapacity of the husband
  2. 2 Whether the husband's incapacity existed at time of marriage, continued and was incurable
  3. 3 Whether statutory bar under section 20(3) (conduct by petitioner) prevented nullity

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence, including admissions, contemporaneous correspondence and expert opinion, established the husband was incapable of consummating the marriage at the material times and remained so quoad hanc; the incapacity was not wilful refusal; the petitioner had not led the respondent to believe she would not seek annulment prior to acquiring proof; therefore the marriage was voidable and a decree of nullity was granted.

Court Disposition

Decree of nullity granted in favour of the petitioner; respondent's cross-petition for divorce dismissed

Orders

  • Decree of nullity granted to the petitioner C.C.C.Y.
  • Respondent C.W.L.'s cross-petition for divorce dismissed