Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Backdating of maintenance
  • 31 Jul 2024

    LC v. YM

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 146
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC8974/2022

    The court found the Respondent's pleaded expenses materially exaggerated, accepted adjusted reasonable expenditure figures largely along the Petitioner's proposals, found the Petitioner had means to pay interim maintenance (supported by his prior consent to pay RMB30,000), awarded maintenance pending suit for the Respondent at HK$11,000 per month and interim maintenance for the Eldest Son at HK$23,000 per month commencing 18 August 2024, refused to backdate payments, dismissed paragraph 4 of the Respondent's summons, discharged paragraph 1 of the 11 December 2023 order, and ordered costs nisi…

  • 29 May 2024

    OP-PS v. T (T-H) W

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 117
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMP163/2020

    Court found both parties' evidence not fully credible, drew adverse inferences against father for under‑disclosure and found mother was employed with an earning capacity of HK$50,000; on a broad‑brush assessment of the child's needs and parents' means the court apportioned child expenses two‑thirds to father and one‑third to mother and ordered father to pay HK$16,600 per month from 1 June 2024; carer allowance to cease from July 2023 and no order as to costs.

  • 7 Sept 2023

    TKY v. YSGA

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 181
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2208/2023

    On a broad‑brush assessment the wife's and children's reasonable monthly needs were HK$116,800; the wife can contribute HK$89,000 from her HK$160,000 income leaving a deficit of HK$27,800 which the court rounded to HK$28,000; the husband’s earning capacity was inferred at HK$85,000/month given past incomes and family support; accordingly interim maintenance of HK$28,000/month (HK$14,000 per child) backdated to 1 December 2022 was ordered and a limited LCP of HK$1,200,000 (payable by 12 monthly instalments of HK$100,000) was awarded as proportionate and sufficient for proceedings to FDR.

  • 27 Jun 2023

    LKM v. LWC

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 124
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6076/2022

    Applying the MPPO and established authorities the court conducted a broad‑brush assessment of immediate reasonable needs and the Husband's means, calculated the Wife's and Child's monthly needs at HK$50,812 against the Wife's income plus existing child maintenance of HK$44,000, found a monthly shortfall of HK$6,812 and ordered the Husband to pay monthly MPS of HK$6,812 (commencing 1 July 2023), maintained child interim at HK$15,000 per month, and ordered backdated payments for the periods identified (MPS 1 April 2022–30 June 2023 and child difference 1 April 2022–31 October 2022) with specifi…

  • 1 Feb 2023

    SES also known as SBE-S v. HKL

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 27
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7243/2008

    The court found H breached the 2017 Variation Order by failing to inform the wife and court about GH; GH is profit-making and H as majority shareholder/director has access to its liquidity such that his resources can support maintenance. On reassessment of needs and resources the court varied the 2017 Order: spousal maintenance reduced to HK$36,000 pcm with backdating and arrears, child maintenance set at HK$35,000 pcm with backdating and specific payment routing to the child when studying overseas, ordered contribution to university fees of HK$300,000 per year with sharing formula above HK$6…

  • 30 Sept 2022

    LKY v. OCF

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 206
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7215/2021

    Applying a broad‑brush assessment of needs and means, the court found the wife had limited earning capacity and the husband was in a materially stronger position (including likely access to paternal support and significant assets held or purportedly held on trust); accordingly the husband’s undertaking of HK$22,500 was insufficient and must be increased by specific monthly orders: MPS HK$12,808.36 and interim maintenance for two children HK$31,780, with school fees and insurance to be paid direct; costs ordered nisi to husband.

  • 17 Aug 2022

    LPC v. CKHA

    Citation
    [2022] HKCA 1190
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV304/2022

    The Judge had erred in his findings on the Husband's investment position and failed adequately to consider the Wife's financial capability; applying the correct broad-brush approach, it was nevertheless reasonable to order MPS and to backdate it to 26 February 2018, but on adjusted monthly sums and with specified transitional reductions to reflect rent-free periods and interim payments already made.

  • 12 Apr 2022

    NSK v. LWCJ

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 77
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4241/2021

    Applying the broad‑brush approach and having considered the child's needs, the family's financial circumstances and the husband's historical and likely continuing contribution (including contributions from his father), the court found HK$14,000 per month a fair and reasonable interim maintenance sum which the husband is able to pay; the backdating claim was refused and a costs order nisi in favour of the petitioner was granted.

  • 18 Mar 2022

    TPKL v. CMCY

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 53
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMP3/2021

    Applying the broad-brush approach, the court set interim maintenance at HK$5,000 per month because the mother's claim of HK$46,600 was unreasonable on the facts, the father's declared income indicated limited ability to pay, and detailed enquiries into earning capacity or beneficial ownership of assets were inappropriate at the interim stage; the backdating claim was dismissed.

  • 2 Jul 2021

    YNNA v. HCKW

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 124
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6626/2015

    The court found that, on its proper construction, the consent order of 19 December 2019 (and the subsequent agreed variation fixing monthly payments at HK$50,000) largely settled the children's maintenance matter and the limited proviso did not permit a lump sum award as compensation for alleged past shortfalls; accordingly the petitioner's application for backdating was dismissed and costs were awarded to the respondent.