Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Attachment of income

  • 18 Jul 2023

    SJH v. AMS

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 140
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC5963/2016

    The court construed the 2018 consent order, found the respondent in clear default of express undertakings, accepted evidence he had access to funds and prioritized other payments, concluded the default was not accidental and that he knew the facts making his omissions contempt; contempt was proven beyond reasonable doubt and a custodial sentence of three months, releasable on payment of the full judgment debt, was appropriate given aggravating conduct and lack of cooperation.

  • 4 Dec 2020

    MYPC v. CWH

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 253
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC8147/2014

    Applying s.11 and s.7 MPPO and authorities, the court found the Father has stable high salaried employment and material financial resources (including family assistance and multiple properties), the Mother has limited but extant resources and earning capacity, and the Father failed full disclosure on property investments thereby permitting adverse inferences; on balance the 2014 consent maintenance figures (with statutory annual increases tied to civil service pay) remain reasonable and payable by the Father. Therefore both the Father's application to decrease and the Mother's application to…

  • 23 Apr 2018

    HTL v. CWWM also known as CW

    Citation
    [2018] HKFC 56
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2445/2016

    The ex‑parte prohibition application was unmeritorious because the evidence did not establish probable cause that the respondent was about to leave Hong Kong; however the application was a reasonable attempt to secure interim MPS so the proper order is to make all costs of the ex‑parte order, its extensions and the costs hearing costs in the cause of the ancillary relief, to be taxed if not agreed.

  • 18 Feb 2015

    MSK v. GL

    Citation
    MSK v. GL
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1559/2014

    On the evidence the husband did not possess substantial hidden assets; applying MPPO s7 factors and LKW v DD steps the court ordered sale of the two matrimonial properties with equal division of net proceeds but departed from strict equality by awarding the wife a capitalized maintenance lump sum of HK$480,000 (four years) plus HK$100,000 share of liabilities and HK$4,000 costs, totaling HK$584,000 on a clean break; interim maintenance to continue until proceeds available and attachment order unnecessary given clean break.

  • 21 Oct 2011

    SMC v. JAC

    Citation
    SMC v. JAC
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC5555/2009

    Husband's application to reduce child maintenance was dismissed because disclosed finances showed sufficient surplus and no good and substantial cause to vary the consent order; Wife's application succeeded in part because relocation and loss of employment subsidy constituted a material change and fairness required husband to contribute to increased school costs; court fixed contribution at 70% of Canadian school fees reflecting prior 70/30 split and included it in orders; repeated unjustified deductions established reasonable grounds that husband would not make full and punctual payments, ju…

  • 12 Mar 2008

    L v. N

    Citation
    L v. N
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC3759/1993

    The order of 4 May 2006 was set aside because service of the originating summonses was ineffective and the change of relief at the hearing (to transfer of pension) was so fundamental that the Respondent was entitled to be served and heard; an irregularly obtained order must be set aside under O.13 r.9 without regard to the merits of any defence.

  • 19 May 2006

    YSL v. TKC

    Citation
    YSL v. TKC
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC9234/1997

    Applying s.11(7) and the s.7 factors the court found the respondent's declared current income and expenses left limited surplus, the petitioner and daughter had some earning capacity and potential rental income from the 2nd floor, there was insufficient evidence of undisclosed income despite credibility concerns; accordingly the court allowed a downward variation to HK$2,000 per month total (HK$1,000 each) from March 2004 and made an attachment of income for enforcement due to prior non‑compliance.

  • 10 Mar 2006

    C v. K

    Citation
    C v. K
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6299/2000

    On balance the children's needs and the husband's demonstrated earning capacity justified an increase of maintenance to HK$20,000 per month for the two children (HK$10,000 each) from 1 April 2006; however, absent direct evidence that the husband diverted income to his girlfriend or that he will imminently default, and having regard to substantial judgment debt and repayment commitments forced upon him, the court refused to make an attachment order at this time; costs awarded to the wife to follow the event.