TCWF v. LKKS

TCWF v. LKKS

Judge found D‑Day dispositions and 2006 CLA set aside; the husband is legal and beneficial owner subject to amorphous rights of the father but those contingent rights do not remove assets from account; rejected doctrine of dynastic custodianship; assessed husband’s net worth at HK$6,426.2m and total divisible assets HK$6,505m; applied sharing principle but departed from equal sharing because of the father's extraordinary contribution and rights; fixed wife's share at 20% of total (HK$1,301m), credited her assets HK$79m, leaving net payable HK$1,222m; awarded Duxbury capital HK$215m for wife, child provision HK$23.4m, a fighting fund HK$60m, ordered US$26m (HK$202m) to be paid forthwith by...

Citation
TCWF v. LKKS
Parties
Petitioner (wife): TCWF; Respondent (husband): LKKS; 2nd Intervening Party (father): STL; 3rd Intervening Party (corporate): OIL
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 July 2012
Case Number
HCMC5/2008
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief (matrimonial Causes) / Judgment (final Ancillary Relief and Interlocutory Rulings)
Outcome
Ancillary relief awarded to Petitioner (wife). Declarations and orders made setting aside D‑Day dispositions and 2006 CLA; wife awarded 20% of total divisible assets being HK$1,301,000,000 gross, credit for her assets HK$79,000,000, net payable HK$1,222,000,000; immediate payment of father’s Thomas offer...
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Sharing Principle, S 7 MPPO Factors, S 17 MPPO Setting Aside Dispositions, Pleadings and Deemed Admissions (rhc O.18 R13(1)), Valuation and Disclosure, Conduct in Ancillary Relief, Dynastic Property/custodianship, Duxbury Calculation, Forgery and Conspiracy Allegations
Source Language
EN
Family Law Matrimonial Property Trusts and Third‑party Rights Civil Procedure Criminal Referral/publication Ancillary Relief Sharing Principle S 7 MPPO Factors +7 more

Case Brief

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 8 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TCWF

Petitioner (wife)

LKKS

Respondent (husband)

STL

2nd Intervening Party (father)

OIL

3rd Intervening Party (corporate)

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief (matrimonial Causes) / Judgment (final Ancillary Relief and Interlocutory Rulings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What assets/resources fall to be taken into account for ancillary relief including third party rights under the Framework Agreement
  2. 2 Whether D‑Day dispositions should be set aside under s 17 MPPO and effect of deemed admissions
  3. 3 Valuation of major assets (Japanese property, BBJ, yachts, house, wine, cars) and appropriate valuation date

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found D‑Day dispositions and 2006 CLA set aside; the husband is legal and beneficial owner subject to amorphous rights of the father but those contingent rights do not remove assets from account; rejected doctrine of dynastic custodianship; assessed husband’s net worth at HK$6,426.2m and total divisible assets HK$6,505m; applied sharing principle but departed from equal sharing because of the father's extraordinary contribution and rights; fixed wife's share at 20% of total (HK$1,301m), credited her assets HK$79m, leaving net payable HK$1,222m; awarded Duxbury capital HK$215m for wife, child provision HK$23.4m, a fighting fund HK$60m, ordered US$26m (HK$202m) to be paid forthwith by...

Court Disposition

Ancillary relief awarded to Petitioner (wife). Declarations and orders made setting aside D‑Day dispositions and 2006 CLA; wife awarded 20% of total divisible assets being HK$1,301,000,000 gross, credit for her assets HK$79,000,000, net payable HK$1,222,000,000; immediate payment of father’s Thomas offer...

Orders

  • Set aside the November 4 2009 dispositions (D‑Day transfers) and the 2006 CLA (orders made 23 February 2011)
  • Wife awarded HK$1,301,000,000 in satisfaction of ancillary relief claim (20% of total assets) with credit for wife’s own assets of HK$79,000,000 leaving HK$1,222,000,000 payable by husband