YXY v. YYW

YXY v. YYW

Applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that the 2009 CIES Report was sufficiently relevant to matters in issue in the Section 10 application; although the Report likely exists, it contains historic 2009 information and disclosure would be oppressive and amount to fishing rather than necessary for fair...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
YXY v. YYW
Parties
Applicant (mother): YXY; Respondent (father): YYW
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 December 2016
Case Number
FCMP7/2013
Procedural Posture
Section 10 Guardianship of Minors Ordinance Financial Relief (ancillary Child Maintenance) / Specific Discovery Application at Pre‑trial Review
Outcome
Discovery Summons dismissed; costs ordered to respondent; Costs Order Nisi
Legal Topics
Specific Discovery, Ancillary Relief, Child Maintenance, Costs
Source Language
en
Family Law Civil Procedure Immigration Law Specific Discovery Ancillary Relief Child Maintenance Costs

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 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YXY

Applicant (mother)

YYW

Respondent (father)

Procedural Posture

Section 10 Guardianship of Minors Ordinance Financial Relief (ancillary Child Maintenance) / Specific Discovery Application at Pre‑trial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2009 CIES Report exists and is in the respondent's possession or power
  2. 2 Whether the 2009 Report is relevant to matters in issue in the Section 10 application
  3. 3 Whether a prima facie case has been established to justify specific discovery

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that the 2009 CIES Report was sufficiently relevant to matters in issue in the Section 10 application; although the Report likely exists, it contains historic 2009 information and disclosure would be oppressive and amount to fishing rather than necessary for fair disposal or saving costs; therefore specific discovery was refused and the Discovery Summons dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Discovery Summons dismissed; costs ordered to respondent; Costs Order Nisi

Orders

  • The Applicant's Summons dated 19 November 2015 (Discovery Summons) be dismissed
  • The Applicant do pay the Respondent all the costs of and occasioned by the Discovery Summons, including all costs reserved, to be taxed if not agreed