Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Periodical payments

  • 21 Nov 2025

    L W S v. T M L T

    Citation
    [2025] HKFC 183
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMP129/2019

    The court found ABA therapy was necessary for the child but the Mother failed to prove that Autism Circle was a reasonable provider or that she had paid the sums claimed to Autism Circle; Autism Circle\u2019s receipts and Mother\u2019s deposit slips were unreliable and rejected; HK$1.1m from Father treated partly (half assessed) as provision for the child and deducted; balancing the parties\u2019 means and child\u2019s best interests the court awarded a lump sum of HK$1,842,442 and periodical payments (HK$57,500/month from 15 Aug 2024 to 14 Dec 2024; HK$69,000/month from 15 Dec 2024 until maj…

  • 10 Oct 2023

    RMH v. GY

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 204
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMP38/2020

    Applying a broad brush assessment and having discounted inflated claims, the court allowed direct undertakings from the father for school and medical expenses and ordered periodical maintenance of HK$250,000 per month (rounded from an assessed total of HK$241,040) to reflect the child's reasonable needs and the father's wealth, with lump sum/set-up claims mostly rejected as refundable to father given mother’s overspending and lack of justification.

  • 12 Aug 2022

    ST otherwise SST v. MFP

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 168
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7467/2009

    The husband\'s variation summons was dismissed because he failed to establish a material decline in his ability to pay and engaged in material non-disclosure; the court therefore made a modest upward variation for the wife to HK$137,000 per month (CPI-linked, backdated to June 2020) and ordered direct payments to H of HK$23,000 per month (CPI-linked) while upholding the respondent\'s undertakings relating to the education fund and school/university fees (recitals J and N) but discharging specified ancillary undertakings (recitals F, H, K and part of L); costs were awarded to reflect the respo…

  • 30 Apr 2021

    YUEN NUI TONG v. LEE KAM CHUEN AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2021] HKDC 509
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCEC1750/2017

    Court accepted unchallenged evidence of applicant's monthly earnings at HK$16,800, applied the 50% loss for loss of sight of one eye under the First Schedule and s9, used 72 months under s7(1)(b) for calculation, awarded section 10 at four-fifths for 162 days sick leave endorsed by the Board, and section 10A medical expenses of HK$500, resulting in total judgment HK$677,876 plus interest and costs.

  • 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…

  • 23 Nov 2020

    EBS v. NTC, D

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 242
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2128/2013

    The court applied the sharing principle after assessing needs under s.7 Cap 192, found no hidden assets or convincing claim for add-backs, accepted the parties’ agreed asset schedule (~HK$192.7m), and made a near-equal division with a modest departure in favour of the wife to ensure she retains sufficient income-producing capital; the court also ring-fenced ~HK$8.002m for the child’s education, required the wife to pay the husband HK$7.5m and deposit HK$6m as a contingency for potential increased US CGT on the Bel Air property, and ordered specified periodical child maintenance (interim and o…

  • 12 Mar 2020

    劉 對 李

    Citation
    [2020] HKCA 160
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CAMP283/2019

    The court refused the out‑of‑time application because the applicant failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success on appeal; the trial judge lawfully found a substantial unforeseen reduction in income but properly took account of the applicant's assets and reasonably exercised discretion to reduce maintenance to HK$6,000; appellate interference with those factual and discretionary conclusions was not warranted absent a serious error.

  • 4 Mar 2020

    HMSE v. JJS

    Citation
    [2020] HKCA 139
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CAMP272/2019

    Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show the judge had wrongly exercised her discretion or that there was an interest of justice meriting an appeal; the judge's assessment of accommodation, periodical payments and lump sum was supported by the record and the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to displace the judge's broad discretionary evaluation.

  • 8 Nov 2019

    CKKA v. WCLI

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 287
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC14230/2016

    On the balance of probabilities the Husband has been receiving and is likely to continue receiving at least HK$5,000 per month in third‑party assistance (principally from mother/elder sister), his own income averages about HK$20,000/month, the Daughter’s international school fees are a reasonable need, and in applying s.7 MPPO and LKW v DD steps the fair outcome is to order HK$13,000/month for the Daughter and nominal maintenance to the Wife while denying substantive periodical maintenance to the Wife beyond that.