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
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success or any compelling reason; the trial judge's factual findings and application of LKW principles were not shown to be plainly wrong and therefore did not justify granting leave.
Source excerpt
Ancillary relief judgment in a short Hong Kong marriage, with retrospective and ongoing child maintenance orders, a lump sum for the wife, and dismissal of remaining claims on compliance.
Court determined total net family assets at HK$5,953,809.23, rejected applicant's claim that HK$861,700 from her parents was a repayable debt (holding it to be gift/soft loan) and therefore excluded it from liabilities, applied the sharing principle but departed from equal split because applicant had higher future needs, greater contribution in childcare and respondent had greater earning capacity and pre-marital mainland asset; awarded applicant 55% (~HK$3,274,595) and ordered specific sale of the marital home with net payment of HK$3,150,000 to be paid to applicant via Legal Aid and other a…
Source excerpt
The judge found the husband had not shown a reasonable prospect of success on any pleaded ground and no other reason in the interests of justice existed to grant leave under s63A(2); the trial judge had lawfully and properly exercised discretion in respect of costs and property division and no arguable legal or factual error was identified, therefore the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and the applicant ordered to pay the respondent's costs of $1,000 (interim).
Source excerpt
Court found separation date was July 2009; Cheung Sha Wan property was acquired after separation with respondent's post-separation funds and is non‑matrimonial (or justifies departure from equal sharing); applicant failed to make full, credible disclosure so adverse inferences applied; applicant's future need assessed at HK$3,240,000 minus disclosed assets (HK$98,723.11) but allowing an adverse inference reduced recovery to a fair lump sum of HK$2,513,000; ordered applicant to vacate Cheung Sha Wan property within 4 months and respondent to pay HK$2,513,000 in staged payments with respondent…
Source excerpt
Court included contested post‑separation assets (notably $3,271,040, insurance policies, MPF and carpark proceeds) in the matrimonial pool, found pervasive credibility problems and incomplete disclosure, applied the LKW five‑step approach, concluded parties have comparable earning capacities and needs, exercised discretion to depart from equal sharing and awarded 70% of the family assets to the applicant and 30% to the respondent (applicant $13,656,235.6; respondent $5,852,672.4), with mandatory sale of the former matrimonial home and specified distribution mechanics.
Source excerpt
The Court granted leave to appeal limited to the single issue of whether one‑third of the respondent's retirement pension was correctly treated as family asset, and directed procedural steps: service of the notice of appeal within 14 days, filing and listing under High Court Rules Order 59 r5, and permitted the appeal to be disposed of on written submissions unless the parties notify disagreement within 14 days of service.
Source excerpt
Permission to appeal was refused because the applicant's grounds had no reasonable prospect of success: the factual analysis of aggregated assets showed at most a limited claim (estimated at HKD200,000) and the parties reached a negotiated settlement of HKD100,000 which the court endorsed; procedural complaints did not establish a miscarriage of justice warranting leave.
Source excerpt
The court held there was insufficient evidence that the respondent's remortgage and subsequent expenditure amounted to the sort of wanton, deliberate dissipation that justifies add-back; therefore remortgage proceeds were not re-attributed. The court accepted the agreed current market value and bank evidence of mortgage balance, fixed matrimonial assets at HK$1,800,000, applied equal sharing to give the applicant HK$900,000, reduced that by HK$375,000 for concealed savings, and ordered the respondent to pay the applicant HK$525,000 within one month.
Source excerpt
The only matrimonial asset was the former matrimonial home; unproven claimed debts of the husband were disregarded; applying the starting point of equal sharing and having regard to both parties' needs and contributions, the court ordered sale of the property and repayment to the wife of HK$192,000 from sale proceeds (to reimburse her advance), with remaining net proceeds to be divided 50/50; proceeds subject to a first charge in favour of the Director of Legal Aid; practical enforcement orders (vacant possession, timelines, auction fallback and authorization to sign for recalcitrant husband)…
Source excerpt
Explore more
