Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Nominal maintenance

  • 17 Jun 2021

    NWSA v. CTYT

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 119
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC15494/2016

    Court found sufficient contemporaneous evidence to exclude US$564,405 as belonging to third parties and to remove Flat 8A from the matrimonial pool because it was purchased pre-marriage and intended for H's mother/brother; withdrawals for medical and insurance expenses were ordinary family expenditure (no add-back) and redacted settlement correspondence could not be relied upon as an admission to repay; W failed to adduce expert evidence to substantiate lifelong caregiving incapacity; after excluding identified items, remaining matrimonial assets divided equally between parties (save for spec…

  • 24 Mar 2021

    JDW v. TLW (nee TJL)

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 62
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4203/2019

    The court determined this was prima facie a sharing case and, applying the five-step approach and s.7 factors, ordered an overall near-equal division of resources by directing the husband to pay the wife a lump sum of HK$300,000 within 30 days of decree absolute, to continue specified rental and child support undertakings and to make periodical child payments (HK$2,000 per month per child until Aug 2022 then HK$3,500 per month per child until age 18 or cessation of full-time education); nominal spousal maintenance of HK$1 per annum was ordered; the husband's ancillary claims against the respo…

  • 27 Aug 2015

    LEMS v. LCTN

    Citation
    LEMS v. LCTN
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC14731/2010

    Leave to appeal was refused because the judge was satisfied the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and there was no other reason in the interests of justice: the trial judge had considered and addressed the contested issues (earning capacity, living standard, needs, possible inheritance), made credible factual findings and calculations (including Duxbury), and the exercise of discretion to order a clean break and dismiss periodical spousal maintenance fell within the generous ambit of reasonable disagreement and was not plainly wrong.

  • 12 Mar 2013

    MJH v. LSA also known as LAH

    Citation
    MJH v. LSA also known as LAH
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC12005/2008

    The court held that on the evidence and given the parties\' respective incomes and the father\'s undertaking to pay school fees and other child expenses, child maintenance should continue at HK$9,875 per month payable to the respondent and the mother\'s periodical payment should be varied to nominal maintenance of HK$1 per annum effective 1 September 2012; the nominal order was backdated to 1 September 2012. The decision rested on apportioning child and household expenses equitably in light of the large disparity in incomes and the mother\'s current employment.

  • 23 Jun 2011

    SANK v. PGN

    Citation
    SANK v. PGN
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2699/2008

    Both parties were criticised for conduct and failure to negotiate; there shall be no costs order up to 19 April 2011; from 19 April 2011 husband must pay 50% of wife's party-and-party costs (to be taxed if not agreed); wife’s capital ancillary relief claims dismissed; husband ordered to pay HK$14,000 per month for child E from 1 July 2011; husband to contribute 50% of agreed medical costs for E; nominal maintenance to wife of HK$1 per annum.

  • 16 Nov 1990

    IP KU MEA WAH v. IP KING CHO

    Citation
    IP KU MEA WAH v. IP KING CHO
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV114/1990

    Given the inadequacy of factual findings and mutual nondisclosure of financial resources, the Court of Appeal held that the judge's orders for immediate sale of the Mei Foo flat, eviction and a lump sum (orders 1–3) were unjustified and should be set aside; orders for nominal maintenance, periodical payments for children and costs below were to remain in force, and costs of the appeal were to be left to the parties (order nisi) with legal aid taxation for the husband's costs.