Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court refused to reduce maintenance before retirement, but prospectively lowered it to HK$10,000 a month once the payer retires or stops work.
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to act promptly or diligently to recover maintenance (long unexplained delays between informal notices and legal steps, absence of medical evidence to substantiate incapacity), therefore no special circumstances were shown and there was no reasonable prospect of success under s63A(2).
Source excerpt
The court varied spousal maintenance downward, discharged child maintenance, undertakings and holiday allowance, and refused leave to enforce older arrears.
The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent was aware of and wilfully disobeyed the 14‑Sep‑2017 disclosure order and the 2‑Sep‑2015 maintenance order for the period Mar 2016–Oct 2017, and had the means to pay but chose not to, therefore committing civil contempt on counts 1 and 2; the failure to notify a change of address, while actionable under s28A Cap.192 as a statutory offence, did not amount to civil contempt here because no court order to notify was made and no promise to the court was breached.
Source excerpt
The court found there was a material change in circumstances (applicant's retirement and daughters returning to applicant's home) but respondent retained assets (mainland property and some investments) and was given a limited period to realise those assets and seek income; accordingly the maintenance of HK$3,400 per month should continue temporarily until 1 January 2020, after which the order is discharged; arrears of HK$78,200 are payable within 14 days.
Source excerpt
The Family Court granted leave to enforce maintenance arrears older than 12 months, finding special circumstances, and ordered payment of a HK$5,785 shortfall.
The court dismissed a husband’s application to vary maintenance under a consent order, finding no material change in circumstances and emphasizing finality.
Respondent's application to reduce spousal maintenance was dismissed because he failed to discharge the evidential burden of proving a substantive change in financial circumstances; his uncorroborated assertions and refusal to produce readily available documentary evidence warranted an adverse inference; applicant lacks present capacity to earn; original consent order remains in force and respondent must repay arrears with interest and costs in instalments.
Source excerpt
The District Court confirmed a UK maintenance order, refused the husband’s variation request, and ordered him to pay costs in a reciprocal enforcement case.
The District Court confirmed a UK provisional maintenance order for a child, held it could consider grounds beyond those certified by the foreign court, and fixed payment at £500 monthly.
Explore more
