Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Section 7 factors

  • 2 Feb 2015

    CCYM v. PWH

    Citation
    CCYM v. PWH
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1544/2013

    Court valued the parties' assets as a single pool of approximately HKD 4,986,216, included the wife's pre‑marital savings and Canadian property in the asset base but excluded the wife's inheritance as non‑matrimonial (but acknowledged it as a future resource); accepted that the husband's companies are illiquid and primarily income‑producing and accepted the husband's valuation for present purposes; applied a sharing approach but departed from strict equality because each party should retain assets held in their sole names and on account of premarital contributions and commercial realities; or…

  • 28 Nov 2014

    QCSL v. GCJ

    Citation
    QCSL v. GCJ
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2157/2013

    The court found the payments from the wife's father were a loan (soft loan) repayable from the net proceeds before division; rental payments advanced for the wife and children were to be treated as expenses and not included in the wife's share; after repayment of HK$835,822 the remaining net proceeds (approx HK$3,810,350) were to be divided 65% to the wife and 35% to the husband; husband to pay child maintenance HK$6,000 per child per month; nominal spousal maintenance HK$1 per annum; other asset allocations and protections ordered as set out in the judgment.

  • 1 Aug 2014

    CMSJ v. G,JJ

    Citation
    CMSJ v. G,JJ
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC904/2012

    Assets held by each party were predominantly pre-marital and the marriage was very short; therefore apply a needs-based approach rather than equal sharing. On the facts the respondent must pay the petitioner a lump sum of HK$420,000 in full and final settlement of ancillary claims, capitalized educational payments of HK$80,000 per annum for two years, and periodical child maintenance of HK$12,000 per month; each party retains assets in their sole name and the respondent's ancillary claims are dismissed. Costs ordered nisi for 50% of petitioner's costs capped at HK$400,000.

  • 30 May 2014

    KWP v. LCM

    Citation
    KWP v. LCM
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1567/2006

    No enforceable trust existed in respect of the matrimonial home; it is a jointly held matrimonial asset between the parties. Sale of the property was ordered to be postponed until 1 September 2017 to allow the younger son to complete tertiary studies. The husband had dissipated a significant pension lump sum by gambling/trading losses; this justified a modest departure from the yardstick of equality. Net sale proceeds were to be divided 55% to the wife and 45% to the husband on a clean break, with specified orders as to timing, marketing threshold, retention of sole assets, costs nisi orders…

  • 11 Sept 2009

    LSFB v. LWO

    Citation
    LSFB v. LWO
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6499/2004

    Given the petitioner’s limited resources, ongoing childcare responsibilities (including an epileptic daughter), the husband’s absence and lack of support, and the father’s confirmation that his HK$200,000 was a gift, the court ordered transfer of all legal and beneficial interest in Flat X to the petitioner subject to existing encumbrances.

  • 30 Jun 2008

    SSY v. CYS

    Citation
    SSY v. CYS
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6872/2007

    The court found no credible evidence of a binding 1996 full and final settlement; the TLC property was not established as non-matrimonial on the evidence and in any event had been sold; the husband’s unexplained withdrawals of sale proceeds justified an adverse inference and the proceeds of sale (together with the husband’s MPF) were included in the matrimonial pool. Applying section 7 factors and the yardstick of equality, the court ordered an approximately equal division, requiring the husband to pay the wife HK$700,000 (including HK$200,000 in stakeholder funds) and costs to follow the eve…

  • 23 Jan 2007

    C v. T

    Citation
    C v. T
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4706/2001

    Judge found Wife failed to prove transmission of disease; found Husband was the beneficial owner of business and property and had realised and retained proceeds (inferred assets c.HK$926,700); found Husband breached the Deed of Separation by ceasing periodical payments from July 1999; held capital division in the Deed was fair and would not be reopened; awarded arrears of HK$455,000 and ordered reduced future periodical payments of HK$3,000 per month from 1 February 2007; costs to Wife.

  • 13 Sept 2004

    LAML v. TCCY

    Citation
    LAML v. TCCY
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV75/2004

    On the evidence the court reduced the husband's monthly income assessment from HK$35,000 to HK$30,000, held that business expense reimbursements could not be treated as personal income without detailed inquiry, applied a broad brush approach to interim maintenance and varied the order to require the husband to pay HK$8,000 per month to each child.