Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Domicile

  • 26 Mar 2026

    RE CHAN CHI SAT

    Citation
    [2026] HKCFI 1766
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB533/2025

    On the totality of the evidence the Debtor was not ordinarily resident in Hong Kong, did not have a place of residence in Hong Kong, had not carried on business in Hong Kong during the relevant three year period and, having abandoned his domicile of choice, had reverted to his domicile of origin; accordingly the conditions in section 4(1) of the Bankruptcy Ordinance were not satisfied and the court lacked jurisdiction to make a bankruptcy order, so the amended petition is dismissed; separately, the court held that service of the statutory demand by advertisement on 16 July 2024 was a reasonab…

  • 28 Jan 2026

    RE ERTH BINUO

    Citation
    [2026] HKCFI 646
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB7447/2025

    The petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the petitioner failed to discharge the burden of proving that the debtor was domiciled in Hong Kong at the time of presentation; the petitioner offered no cogent evidence and only sought more time rather than adducing evidence despite the debtor putting domicile in issue in advance.

  • 18 Nov 2024

    ROBERT SCOTT WOODS, THE TRUSTEE-IN-BANKRUPTCY OF PHILLIP JAMES KINGSTON v. INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINA (ASIA) LTD

    Citation
    [2024] HKCFI 3311
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP1789/2024

    The Federal Court sequestration and trustee appointment were recognised because the Australian proceedings were collective, the bankrupt had submitted to the Australian court (at least by waiver) and was domiciled in Australia at the relevant time; recognition and the ancillary disclosure order were necessary to enable the trustee to carry out statutory functions and were consistent with Hong Kong law and public policy, so the High Court granted recognition and ordered ICBC to produce specified documents within 42 days and conferred specified investigative and litigation powers on the trustee.

  • 1 Nov 2024

    WSN v. BOM

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 191
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC3210/2023

    Ireland was not shown to be clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum. The Husband's evidence supports a domicile of Hong Kong; Hong Kong courts can properly deal with the international assets and consider foreign pensions in ancillary relief; enforcement and multi‑jurisdictional proceedings are inevitable in either forum; and the absence of a 'clean break' principle in Ireland would cause a significant personal and juridical disadvantage to the Husband. Accordingly the Wife's application for a stay was refused.

  • 30 Apr 2024

    CW v. CC

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 92
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC11025/2022

    After holistic evaluation of pleaded factors and evidence as at the date of petition the court found none of the nine grounds (whether individually or cumulatively) established a substantial connection to Hong Kong for either party under s.3(c); accordingly the court lacked jurisdiction and the petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

  • 4 Mar 2024

    RE PANG YUFENG

    Citation
    [2024] HKCFI 663
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4767/2022

    Personal service of the statutory demand on 25 September 2021 was established by the process server's affirmations, contemporaneous photographs and GPS tag; service of the petition was effective by postage to the Wanchai address and by service on the Debtor's solicitors; the Debtor had a place of residence and was ordinarily resident in Hong Kong within the relevant three‑year period and failed to prove a change of domicile to the US; therefore the court had jurisdiction and a bankruptcy order was made against the Debtor.

  • 29 Jan 2024

    YB v. LX

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 16
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC596/2022

    Leave to amend the petition was granted despite lateness because the evidence necessary to consider all three jurisdictional limbs was already before the court and prejudice to the respondent could be remedied by directions and costs. On the merits, the amended petition was dismissed for want of jurisdiction: neither party was domiciled in Hong Kong as at the date of the petition, neither party was habitually resident in Hong Kong throughout the three years immediately preceding the petition, and neither party had a substantial connection with Hong Kong given their continuous residence, emplo…

  • 14 Jun 2023

    RE FANG SAU MEI ANGEL

    Citation
    [2023] HKCFI 1595
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB1023/2023

    The bankruptcy order was proper because the debt was established by final judgment and the debtor failed to file required notice or affidavit and did not, on the balance of probabilities, prove abandonment of her Hong Kong domicile or acquisition of a new domicile abroad; bare assertions and travel records did not discharge the burden to rebut the presumption of domicile of origin.

  • 4 Nov 2022

    朱 v. 劉

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 223
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC8529/2021

    On the balance of probabilities the Respondent was domiciled in Canada as at the date of the petition and the Petitioner failed to prove that either party had a sufficient substantial connection with Hong Kong under s.3(c) MCO; accordingly the Hong Kong courts lacked jurisdiction and the petition is dismissed. Alternatively, even if jurisdiction existed, the Luohu Court in the PRC is the more appropriate forum for the disputes; the PRC ruling filed post‑hearing was admitted but did not alter the conclusion. The MPS summons is therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Costs ordered to foll…

  • 27 May 2021

    JQ v. CLH

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 105
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7498/2018

    On the facts the husband, though no longer domiciled in Hong Kong, maintained an unbroken, significant economic and social presence in Hong Kong (longstanding executive roles in a Hong Kong listed company, Hong Kong salary and dividends, Hong Kong loan facilities secured on Hong Kong properties, ownership of Hong Kong properties, regular business and social visits) which cumulatively amounted to a substantial connection at the date of the petition; accordingly the Family Court has jurisdiction under s3(c) and the husband's summons to dismiss for want of jurisdiction is dismissed.