SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (in his capacity as the Central Authority designated under the Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance, Cap. 512) v. YWG AND ANOTHER

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (in his capacity as the Central Authority designated under the Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance, Cap. 512) v. YWG AND ANOTHER

The court exercised its wide discretion on costs, found no exceptional circumstances to depart from the general practice of no order as to costs because the mother's conduct was explainable by legal advice, the alleged additional costs were not shown to be unreasonable or caused by inadmissible evidence, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 250
Parties
Plaintiff (central Authority): Secretary for Justice; 1st Defendant (mother): YWG; 2nd Defendant (father): TP
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 January 2025
Case Number
HCMP2311/2024
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Return Application Under Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance (cap.512) / Decision on Costs (paper Disposal)
Outcome
No order as to costs of the action; costs order nisi that there be no order as to the costs of the application for costs.
Legal Topics
Hague Convention Article 26 Expenses, Article 13(b) Intolerable Situation, Costs Orders in Children Proceedings, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
en
Family Law International Child Abduction Procedural Law on Costs Hague Convention Article 26 Expenses Article 13(b) Intolerable Situation Costs Orders in Children Proceedings Admissibility of Evidence

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Secretary for Justice

Plaintiff (central Authority)

YWG

1st Defendant (mother)

TP

2nd Defendant (father)

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Return Application Under Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance (cap.512) / Decision on Costs (paper Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be ordered against the abducting parent
  2. 2 Whether the mother's conduct amounted to exceptional/unreasonable conduct warranting costs
  3. 3 Whether mother's late change of stance caused recoverable wasted costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its wide discretion on costs, found no exceptional circumstances to depart from the general practice of no order as to costs because the mother's conduct was explainable by legal advice, the alleged additional costs were not shown to be unreasonable or caused by inadmissible evidence, and the change of stance did not delay the ultimate return order; therefore no order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs of the action; costs order nisi that there be no order as to the costs of the application for costs.

Orders

  • No order as to the costs of the action
  • Order that the no order as to costs covers the costs of the Department of Justice