Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Capacity to pay

  • 19 Mar 2024

    袁 對 許

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 53
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6915/2011

    Applicant failed to prove a substantial and bona fide reduction in means sufficient to justify varying the existing maintenance orders: his claimed increased rental outlay was overstated, he had significant MPF withdrawals available, and his overall capacity to pay remained such that the existing orders were sustainable; accordingly both variation applications were dismissed and the existing maintenance orders were maintained.

  • 15 Mar 2023

    鄭 對 孫

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 53
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCJA3914/2018

    The court found the husband had not made full and frank disclosure and, on the evidence (including the social welfare report and wife's account), drew an adverse inference that the husband had additional undeclared income (likely trading activity). On that basis the court concluded the husband has the capacity to pay HK$3,000 per month and ordered that sum as child maintenance payable from 1 April 2023.

  • 15 Feb 2022

    DB v. DMA

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 34
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1006/2021

    Because the respondent's financial disclosure was deficient but evidence established he continued to fund most household and child expenses and had capacity to make modest additional payments, the court ordered continuation of specified existing payments by the respondent and awarded maintenance pending suit of HK$1,800/month to the petitioner and interim maintenance for the children of HK$4,600/month (total HK$6,400/month), with specified backdated sums and directions for disclosure of children's documents for medical appointments and costs to the petitioner.

  • 13 Dec 2019

    S, S R (formerly known as D, P A) v. S, R P

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 321
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6925/2019

    Although the respondent claimed business failure and substantial indebtedness, his disclosure was found to be obviously deficient; on the evidence the respondent nevertheless had present financial capacity to meet reasonable interim payments without disposing of the AMC debenture or the preserved art collection. The court assessed and allowed modest, specific monthly sums for the petitioner and children, ordered maintenance of insurance and school fees, and directed payments to commence from 1 November 2019 into the petitioner's bank account.

  • 21 Nov 2019

    C, M v. G, R P

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 298
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1915/2019

    The court granted interim maintenance of HK$4,000 per child per month (HK$8,000 total) because the Petitioner's itemised child expenses were reasonable, there was insufficient evidence that the Danish properties produced accessible net income to the Petitioner, it was reasonable not to impute a nominal income to the Petitioner while caring for a newborn, and the Respondent had capacity to pay an additional HK$3,000 per month above his existing payments.

  • 2 Apr 2019

    陳 對 支

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 86
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2471/2017

    Applying the broad brush approach the court accepted the wife's averaged income (HK$57,101.49) and adjusted her expenses to a reasonable level (HK$70,300), found the husband’s claimed HK$30,000 excessive given his retirement and limited assets, and concluded the wife has capacity to pay interim maintenance of HK$15,000 per month; ordered retroactive payment to 22 Feb 2018 totalling HK$210,000 to be paid in 10 instalments and ordered costs in favour of the husband.

  • 21 Jul 2005

    MYRIAD ELECTRONICS LTD v. ENITY TECHNOLOGY LTD

    Citation
    MYRIAD ELECTRONICS LTD v. ENITY TECHNOLOGY LTD
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV132/2005

    The appeal was dismissed because the Court upheld the judge's exercise of discretion: the proposed set-offs were at best weak or 'shadowy' (poaching and Proposition 65 claims lacked necessary evidence and legal basis), implied terms did not cover compliance with specific foreign labelling law absent clear notice or reliance, and the defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving inability to comply with the payment condition when given the opportunity in court and thereafter provided only vague, unsubstantiated evidence.

  • 29 Jan 1981

    CAPTAIN HSIEH CHIH CHIEN v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    CAPTAIN HSIEH CHIH CHIEN v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC1065/1980

    The magistrate erred in assessing the fine on the basis of an owners' undertaking to pay; the fundamental principle that fines must be within the offender's own capacity to pay applies, and in absence of the offender being properly to be treated as indemnified the sentence was excessive; appeal allowed to reduce the fine to HK$8,000.

  • 19 Mar 1975

    ATTORNEY GENERAL v. PANG LAU

    Citation
    ATTORNEY GENERAL v. PANG LAU
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CAAR4/1975

    The court refused to increase the fine because Section 5 restricts first offenders to fines only and the established principle that courts must have regard to an offender's capacity to pay meant that, absent reliable evidence of capacity and in light of the respondent's assertions and conduct (business closed, paid by loan, now hawking), there was a reasonable doubt as to capacity to bear a larger fine; therefore the review application to increase the fine failed.