Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Financial disclosure (form e)

  • 28 Mar 2024

    C, N v. L, W

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 62
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC3765/2022

    On a broad‑brush balancing of the children's interim reasonable needs and the parties' financial resources, and having found the Father's disclosure and claimed infirmity unsupported, the court varied the Master's interim maintenance order from HK$18,000 to HK$13,000 per month (HK$6,500 each) as reasonable and within the Father's ability to pay, with payments to the Mother's HSBC account and no order as to costs.

  • 24 Aug 2023

    NS v. NK

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 171
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC8255/2022

    The court refused the Husband's unprocedural late evidence except for a limited update on employment, found on the evidence that the Husband has an earning capacity of not less than HK$50,000 per month, calculated the children's reasonable monthly needs and ordered equal sharing of those needs resulting in maintenance of HK$5,500 per child (HK$27,500 total), and ordered costs against the Husband.

  • 8 Mar 2023

    陸 對 梁

    Citation
    [2023] HKCA 306
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CAMP317/2022

    The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or a prima facie case of factual error: most complaints were factual challenges that were not supported by evidence or were not raised at trial (notably the housing/vacation of quarters claim), and the trial judge's assessment of assets, income and child needs was not shown to be plainly wrong; accordingly leave to appeal was refused.

  • 3 Dec 2021

    NPYJ v. SMRC

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 241
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC9098/2018

    The court partially allowed H's summons: it re-amended and reinstated specific questions where proportionate and relevant, disallowed or narrowed requests that were too wide or fishing, required answers to be verified by statement of truth, reinstated FDR, and maintained the existing trial timetable because the court found the orders of 8 October 2021 achievable with reasonable diligence.

  • 5 Jul 2019

    TYT v. TLH

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 177
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCJA3690/2017

    The court refused to order expanded general discovery because the applicant failed to show the documents were in the respondent's possession custody or control and failed to establish necessity or proportionality for extending the statutory 12-month Form E disclosure period; specific discovery requires particularisation and, absent such specification or proof of control (including joinder of third parties where assets are in third party names), the orders sought must be dismissed.

  • 15 Nov 2018

    LYY v. WYW

    Citation
    [2018] HKFC 201
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC11649/2015

    Respondent was personally served with the order to file Form E, failed to comply and his explanations were rejected; the failure was contumacious, caused substantial and potentially irremediable prejudice to the petitioner, and notwithstanding illness and partial disclosure the contemnor did not purge the contempt sufficiently; therefore a custodial sentence was required and suspension was inappropriate; respondent committed to custody for 8 weeks and ordered to pay petitioner's committal costs on indemnity basis.

  • 4 Jun 2014

    AYST nee AYSC v. DT

    Citation
    AYST nee AYSC v. DT
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC17300/2013

    On a broad-brush assessment the Husband's declared income did not align with his lifestyle and available bank deposits, and travel expenses for access should not take precedence over the children's reasonable needs; accordingly it was fair and reasonable to order interim maintenance of USD750 per month (USD375 per child) (equivalent HK$5,800 per month, HK$2,900 per child) payable monthly from 3 December 2013 until further order.