Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Child custody

Legal area

Court

27 Sept 2023

FKY v. JJA

Citation

[2023] HKFC 200
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC10722/2020

The Court dismissed the Respondent's summons for a stay because he failed to show Hong Kong is not the appropriate forum and failed to establish Germany is clearly and distinctly more appropriate. The Court found the child’s habitual residence is Hong Kong, that Hong Kong proceedings were validly served (Hague service on 28 January 2021), that the Wife had not unequivocally submitted to German jurisdiction, and that the Husband’s expert opinion prepared by his German counsel was of little assistance due to conflict and omissions; on balance justice and the child’s welfare pointed to Hong Kong…
7 Sept 2023

TRH v. KCS

Citation

[2023] HKFC 182
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC8704/2023

Equal shared interim care on a 2-2-5-5 basis was refused because the short-term status quo favoured the mother as main carer and it would not be in the children's best interests to upset that arrangement; however, the father was granted reasonable interim access pending the Social Investigation Report with a specified access timetable starting 11 September 2023 and supervision was not ordered.
28 Jul 2023

KHH v. PKH

Citation

[2023] HKFC 145
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC8332/2017

On the balance of probabilities, the court found the child was placed once in the walk-in wardrobe and that hair removal occurred during December 2021 (likely by helper), but neither amounted to serious abuse; the allegation of indecent assault was not proven and lacked corroboration; father was found credible and unsupervised access was restored with a specific alternating weekly schedule and directions for counselling and co-parenting therapy.
28 Jul 2023

HC formerly known as HWH v. WYH

Citation

[2023] HKFC 146
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC2719/2022

Given unresolved legal uncertainty about the legal status of surrogate children under PCO, HRTO and GMO and the limits of the Family Court's powers, the District Judge declined to make final custody orders for the two surrogate children and transferred the proceedings to the Court of First Instance to enable the exercise of inherent jurisdiction and fuller consideration; custody and maintenance orders were made for the parties' elder son and ancillary directions were given to protect the surrogate children's interests pending High Court disposal.
21 Mar 2023

王對陳

Citation

[2023] HKCA 372
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP212/2022

The Court refused leave to appeal because the applications disclosed no arguable grounds of fact or law, were largely out of time where applicable, consisted of incoherent and irrelevant material that could not form the basis of a proper appeal, and the interlocutory/case‑management orders complained of had been superseded by the final substantive custody judgment; accordingly there was no real prospect of success and leave was refused and costs ordered.
21 Mar 2023

王對陳

Citation

[2023] HKCA 372
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP213/2022

The Court refused leave on all four summonses because the respondent failed to identify any legal, factual or discretionary errors by the three judges, most applications were grossly out of time without satisfactory explanation, the asserted grounds were incoherent and lacked any real prospect of success, and the interim/case-management orders had been overtaken by the final judgment; accordingly leave was refused and costs were ordered, with assessment by paper procedure and no oral hearing permitted under Order 59A(8).
27 Feb 2023

朱對易

Citation

[2023] HKFC 38
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC12673/2019

Court ordered joint custody for both parents but awarded care and control to the mother because the children expressly preferred to remain with her, she had been the primary caregiver, maintaining status quo was in the children's best interests, and the father's health, gambling debt, threatening conduct and forcible administration of medication undermined his suitability for care and control; reasonable access including overnight stays granted to father.
20 Dec 2022

FYK v. HCC

Citation

[2022] HKFC 278
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC7022/2021

Applying the broad‑brush approach the court assessed the wife's reasonable monthly needs at HK$19,737.93 and found a shortfall against the HK$10,000 the husband paid; accepting the husband had some difficulty, the court ordered additional MPS of HK$5,000 (total HK$15,000 per month from 1 Jan 2023) and ordered a one‑off litigation funding payment of HK$30,000 to the wife's legal representative, together with a continuing obligation by the husband to have MC Limited pay mortgage and utilities; costs order nisi of no order as to costs was made to be absolute in 28 days absent application.
26 Sept 2022

YCKS v. MPKC

Citation

[2022] HKFC 204
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC5771/2018

The father failed to demonstrate that the proposed private/foreign expert evidence was necessary or sufficiently relevant to justify displacing government clinical psychological assessment; allowing the appointment would cause undue delay and would not be in the children's best interests, therefore both applications for appointment of the Family Separation Clinic are dismissed.
26 Sept 2022

王 v. 羅

Citation

[2022] HKFC 198
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC1378/2021

H failed to show good reason to withdraw and discontinue the Hong Kong proceedings; Hong Kong has a real and substantial connection and is the clearly more appropriate forum; H had voluntarily and unequivocally submitted to Hong Kong jurisdiction and his conduct constituted forum shopping and vexatious/oppressive behavior; accordingly summonses for withdrawal were dismissed and an anti-suit injunction was granted restraining H from continuing the PRC/Daxing proceedings; costs ordered to W (costs to follow the event) nisi for 14 days.