Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Best interests principle

Legal area

Court

3 Sept 2024

RE LYM

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2299
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMH44/2013

Given LYM's chronic schizophrenia, impairments in decision-making, significant assets sufficient to improve accommodation and care, the lack of engagement by her siblings, and absence of explored less restrictive alternatives, reception into guardianship was necessary in her best interests; the Director of Social Welfare, having agreed to act, was appropriate to appoint as public guardian and was therefore appointed for two years with specified powers.
17 Jun 2020

RE CML

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1232
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMH23/2018

The Court of First Instance does not have statutory power under Part II of the MHO to make personal access orders; the Guardianship Board's statutory powers under Part IVB are limited and do not encompass the full range of access orders sought. However, the CFI retains an inherent protective jurisdiction, derived from s12(2)(a) High Court Ordinance and common law, to make welfare‑based orders (including access orders) for MIPs where statutes are silent. Such orders must be made based on the MIP's best interests and welfare. Applying that jurisdiction, the court granted interim access to certa…
27 Jul 2016

CCMJ v. SSM formerly known as SKL

Citation

CCMJ v. SSM formerly known as SKL
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP67/2010

For claims for financial provision for a child the starting point is that costs prima facie follow the event; given the Applicant's unreasonable litigation conduct, repeated delays, withdrawal of proposals and disparity of means, the court refused to vary the costs order nisi and ordered the Applicant to pay the Respondent's costs to be taxed; Certificate for Counsel granted.
9 Oct 2012

H v. N

Citation

H v. N
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP129/2011

Although both parents were responsible and capable, the mother offered a superior living environment and child care arrangement, the social welfare report recommended the mother, and child A expressed a wish to live with her; accordingly, varying interim care and control to the mother and granting the father defined weekly staying access was in the children’s best interests under s3(1) GMO.
11 May 2009

R v. N

Citation

R v. N
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP103/2008

The District Court dismissed the application to appoint the Official Solicitor because: there was no evidence that the children’s views could not be adequately ascertained or represented by the parents, social welfare officer or existing professionals; no social welfare recommendation supported separate representation; the youngest child lacked sufficient maturity and participation risked harm; numerous experts were already involved and adding legal representation would likely cause significant delay prejudicial to the children’s welfare; therefore appointment would not serve a useful purpose…

Hong Kong Case Law

RE LYM

RE CML

CCMJ v. SSM formerly known as SKL

H v. N

R v. N