Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The District Court dismissed a father’s application for leave to appeal in long-running guardianship and maintenance proceedings, and awarded costs to the mother.
The court made the decree nisi absolute, despite unresolved ancillary relief and maintenance issues, after finding the child’s welfare arrangements were the best practicable.
The court dismissed the appeal and upheld repayment of HK$5.6 million maintenance paid after the respondent’s remarriage, finding the payments were made under mistake and repayment was not unjust.
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice; the lower court's interim injunction preserving HKD800,000 in the husband's MPF was a lawful, proportionate and factually supported exercise of discretion to prevent dissipation of assets pending ancillary relief, and appellate intervention was not warranted.
Source excerpt
Ancillary relief trial on asset division, add-backs and child maintenance. The court ordered sale of the main home, equal division, and HK$25,000 monthly child maintenance.
Ancillary relief judgment in which the court found the husband failed to account for substantial assets and departed from equal sharing, awarding 55% of the matrimonial pot to the wife.
The Court of First Instance held that surrogacy-born children may be “children of the family” under the MPPO, allowing custody and maintenance orders without adoption or a parental order.
The court made no order as to costs in ancillary relief and a section 17 application, but ordered the husband to pay the costs of this costs application.
One‑day late filing was excused because delay was minimal and caused no prejudice; permission to appeal was refused because applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success or other reasons warranting a hearing and did not show any plainly wrong factual findings; the provisional costs order was varied so respondent may recover party‑and‑party costs only for the trial days after respondent's open offer (trial days 2–4) and, absent agreement, those costs are to be assessed by the court; no separate costs order is made for the two summonses and the provisional costs order will be…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal in a dispute over a charging-order sale of property, holding the proposed grounds attacked factual findings and credibility without reasonable prospect of success.
Explore more
