Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Legal costs provision

  • 31 Dec 2024

    TKY v. YSGA

    Citation
    [2024] HKCA 1197
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV170/2024

    The Court allowed the husband’s appeal, set aside the HK$1,200,000 LCP Order because the Family Court’s decision relied on incomplete and outdated financial disclosure and contained errors in assessing the wife's disposable income and expenses, rendering the LCP unjustified at that interim stage; the matter was remitted to the Family Court for rehearing before another judge with leave granted to adduce certain fresh documentary evidence (25 August 2023 correspondence), while the husband's parents' letter did not satisfy Ladd v Marshall and was refused as fresh evidence.

  • 20 Oct 2023

    KAR (aka RA, KA) v. NSL

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 210
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC11862/2021

    The court accepted that the Petitioner was entitled to interim maintenance and litigation funding but rejected the Petitioner's inflated estimates for post-relocation living costs in India as unsupported; backdating was limited to the date of the present application (20 September 2022). The court fixed reasonable monthly needs in Hong Kong at HK$19,000 for the Petitioner and HK$17,000 for the child, awarded litigation funding of HK$17,000 per month until the FDR hearing, and ordered the Respondent to continue to pay mortgage instalments, utility bills, management fees, the child’s school fees…

  • 13 Jan 2023

    ALDL v. FTFC AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 6
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13698/2013

    The Judge accepted prior findings that the Wife satisfied the Currey threshold and there was no material change to her financial position; using a broad‑brush discretionary assessment and accounting for prior payments and the Wife's cash, the court exercised fairness to equalise arms and awarded an additional HK$900,000 by instalments (HK$100,000 per month for 9 months) payable to and held by the Wife's solicitors for legal costs; the Husband was found able to pay and the quantum was reduced as inflated estimates were not fully accepted.

  • 12 Jan 2023

    B, GGB aka N, GGB v. B, ND

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 16
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1410/2019

    The Husband's summons was dismissed due to withdrawal and lack of prosecution; the Wife's summons was granted because funds in the escrow account are available and should be applied to satisfy outstanding obligations under the Variation Order (interim maintenance and legal costs) and the parties' joint liability for the London property's management fees; Messrs Oldham, Li & Nie were ordered to release the specified sums and the Wife was awarded costs.

  • 22 Jul 2022

    LCTD v. CKMC

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 150
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6340/2018

    Court assessed husband's monthly needs at $130,000 but declined to grant maintenance pending suit because husband possessed sufficient liquid assets (after a prudent discount for illiquid 'penny' stocks) estimated at about $2,674,000 which could meet needs for approximately 20 months; however the husband satisfied the Currey test for legal costs provision and accordingly the court ordered the wife to pay interim legal costs provision of $202,500 per month from 1 August 2022 until the month the FDR concludes; husband entitled to half the costs of the application to be assessed summarily.

  • 30 Nov 2021

    JLJ (also known as J,JL) v. MMGH (also known as H,MMG)

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 246
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1157/2021

    Applying a broad‑brush balancing of the wife's interim reasonable needs (HK$38,000) against the husband's assessed net paying ability (approximately HK$64,000 per month), and accepting the wife's need for legal costs (HK$20,000 per month) and backdating to 12 April 2021, the court ordered monthly MPS of HK$58,000 (HK$38,000 maintenance + HK$20,000 legal costs) and a lump sum backdated legal costs payment of HK$160,000; the order was conditional on limited undertakings by the husband regarding the Amex card for medical expenses and medical insurance premia.

  • 16 Nov 2021

    S-N N v. N W

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 229
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC552/2020

    On a broad-brush interim assessment the court rejected the husband's asserted drastic income reduction and adverse limitations on his ability to pay, drew adverse inferences from incomplete disclosure and unexplained transfers, accepted the wife's assessed net monthly needs of HK$77,500, and exercised discretion to award interim legal costs contribution of HK$60,000 per month to achieve equality of arms until further order; backdating was refused and the prior interim order was discharged.

  • 16 Nov 2021

    S-N N v. N W

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 229
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4627/2021

    The court rejected the Husband's claimed reduced income and drew adverse inferences from deficient disclosure and unexplained transfers; on a broad brush assessment of marital standard of living the reasonable net needs for Wife and children were fixed at HK$77,500 per month; the wife demonstrated inability to fund litigation through other means for interim purposes and equality of arms warranted a contribution, but quantum limited by lack of detailed estimation to an interim legal costs allowance of HK$60,000 per month; backdating to petition was refused and costs of the summons reserved by…

  • 6 Oct 2020

    CD v. LWS

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 206
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1803/2019

    The court found no material change to justify the wife's claimed increase to HK$200,000; however, owing to passage of time, inflation and the child's growth a modest upward variation was warranted. The wife satisfied the Currey test for interim legal costs; the husband, who had not proven an inability to pay, was ordered to pay an increased MPS of HK$60,000 per month and a legal costs provision of HK$540,000 payable as HK$60,000 monthly instalments for nine months. The wife's broader claims and extravagant items were rejected as not necessary for MPS.

  • 3 Mar 2020

    SYTE v. CCS

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 40
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6268/2019

    Applying s.3 MPPO and the broad‑brush fairness principles, the court found the wife’s reasonable interim needs after adjustments to be $38,000 per month, that the husband had the means to pay given his assets and bank deposits, and that the Currey criteria for a legal costs provision were met; accordingly MPS was awarded at $38,000 per month backdated to 1 September 2019 and a lump sum legal costs provision of $600,000 was ordered to cover costs up to FDR.