Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Section 7 mppo factors

  • 12 Sept 2019

    WW v. LLN formerly known as LSM

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 236
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4996/2018

    The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because the husband failed to show a reasonable prospect of success on any ground; the judge lawfully applied the broad‑brush interim approach to MPS, did not improperly shift the burden of proof, properly exercised discretion on quantum and litigation funding (including backdating), and identified no injustice warranting leave or a stay of execution.

  • 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.

  • 15 Jun 2007

    LO v. WONG

    Citation
    LO v. WONG
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC9860/2005

    Court accepted respondent's evidence on bank movements, accounted certain expenditures against respondent's own share (legal costs and purchase costs of new property), calculated immediate distributable family assets at HK$4,197,915 (excluding pension), applied s.7 MPPO factors (age, duration, needs, contributions, health) and ordered a clean break by awarding the petitioner HK$2,076,000 lump sum, an HK$300,000 pension advance, a staged payment schedule with HK$1,000,000 immediate, sale of the former matrimonial property within 3 months with specified allocation of net proceeds, and a pension…

  • 7 Jan 2005

    WKT v. SPF

    Citation
    WKT v. SPF
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6900/2002

    On the evidence the transfers and withdrawals made by respondent after service of the petition were primarily sourced from parties' joint savings; SL's HK$1,000,000 and HK$230,000 were treated as third party funds except where evidential link to joint savings existed; the court found joint assets totaling approximately HK$1,254,468, set aside the HK$288,000 transfer to the younger son as a disposition to defeat petitioner's claim, and, applying s.7 MPPO factors and the parties' reasonable requirements, awarded petitioner a lump sum of HK$500,000 payable by respondent.