Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Pre-marital cohabitation

  • 1 Feb 2017

    楊 對 陳

    Citation
    楊 對 陳
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC9747/2012

    Applying section 7 and the five‑step LKW approach the court held the cohabitation from about 2003 formed part of the marriage duration, treated the Hong Kong flat, Shenzhen property and Dongguan property as family assets, included MPF and life insurance in the asset pool, fixed total matrimonial assets at HKD 5,712,000, reserved HKD 720,000 for the child’s future needs, applied equal sharing to the remaining HKD 5,000,000 and ordered the husband to pay the wife a lump sum of HKD 1,454,000 (with retention of the matrimonial home by the husband and sale of the Shenzhen property if necessary to…

  • 23 Feb 2011

    LJE v. ZM

    Citation
    LJE v. ZM
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC14025/2008

    The court found on the evidence that the parties did not live as husband and wife before their 2006 marriage because meetings became infrequent from 2003 and the relationship had features consistent with an intimate/financial relationship rather than seamless cohabitation; therefore the marriage duration counted from March 2006 (approximately 2 years). Applying s.7 MPPO and the LKW v DD framework, the court assessed assets and needs, concluded there were no factors warranting an equal split, and ordered a clean break lump sum to the wife equivalent to 20% of total family assets (practical pay…

  • 14 Jul 2008

    K v. C

    Citation
    K v. C
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC5508/2005

    The court found the marriage to be short with no seamless pre-marital cohabitation to extend its duration; the wife's claim for compensation for a foregone concert career was speculative and not established; alleged family loans were examined and certain intra-family liabilities were not treated as immediate enforceable liabilities for asset calculation; applying needs (generously interpreted) rather than sharing or compensation the wife's capitalised needs and deductions produced a fair settlement: transfer of the Federal Hill property and a lump sum of 4.25 million (currency units used in j…