Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Variation of court orders

Legal area

Court

28 Jun 2024

LAI TAI MIU, ROVANA v. EVEREST TIMOTHY WODEHOUSE

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1432
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2224/2019

The court varied the prior orders because the agreed mechanism had become unworkable: market changes, absence of any time limit, and the agent's partisan conduct made it unlikely the Property would be sold at the original reserve; the defendant's reliance on the earlier agreed reserve and Kong Colin was distinguishable; accordingly the court substituted a reasonable, time‑limited price adjustment mechanism (reserve HK$53,000,000 with monthly 3% reductions starting after 31 July 2024) and made consequential directions and costs orders.
31 Jan 2024

HANG SENG BANK LTD v. HUNG KAR YAN KARIN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 373
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP873/2023

The slip rule was properly invoked because the court could not conclude the variation changed the substantive rights the Master intended to grant; absent clear evidence (transcript) that the Revised Order was not the Master’s manifest intention, correction under O.20 r.11 was permissible, and the mortgage deed empowered ordering the Defendant to take steps to perfect security including applying for variation; accordingly the appeal against the Revised Order failed.
10 Jan 2023

WW v. LPQ formerly known as LLN and LSM AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKFC 9
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC8485/2019

The husband’s application to vary the MPS was dismissed because he failed to provide full and frank disclosure and his asserted change of financial circumstances was not credible or internally consistent; the wife was entitled to interim litigation funding, limited to a rounded figure of HKD 500,000 to carry her to trial and mediation, payable by the husband, and the husband must pay the costs of the applications to be summarily assessed.
27 Jul 2021

CHEUNG LAI MUI, the executrix of the estate of CHEUNG PING KAU and the administratrix of the estate of CHEUNG PING FUK (alias CHEUNG BING FUK) v. CHEUNG WAI SHING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFA 28
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV1/2021

The court varied its earlier order so that certification fit for two counsel applies only to costs other than first instance costs because it was not intended to alter the first instance costs order and certification for first instance costs was unnecessary given the complimentary appearance of second counsel; costs otherwise follow the event and were allocated between the parties as ordered.
1 Jun 2021

胡對陳

Citation

[2021] HKFC 106
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC9066/2006

The application was dismissed because there was no legal basis to vary or overturn the final ancillary relief order made after trial and affirmed on appeal; the applicant merely repeated arguments already rejected by the appellate court, and post‑order changes in circumstances do not justify re‑litigation or variation in the absence of a statutory or recognised legal basis.
26 Feb 2021

NG TAT KONG KITH v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1128
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1221/2020

The defendant's application to compel plaintiffs to provide Security Information and to vary the earlier order is dismissed for want of jurisdiction to reopen and vary the order; alternatively, there is no statutory or common law power to compel such disclosure and the defendant has not established exceptional circumstances or a material change of circumstances to justify variation.
26 Feb 2021

CHOW TAT KUEN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1128
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1219/2020

The defendant's application to vary the court's prior order and to compel plaintiffs to provide Security Information is not within the limited scope of the "liberty to apply" provision, no exceptional circumstances justified review pending sealing, the alleged change of circumstances (criminal charges against some plaintiffs) was not material or unforeseeable, and there is no statutory or common law power to compel disclosure of passcodes; accordingly the application is dismissed for want of jurisdiction and refused on the merits.
26 Feb 2021

NEXT DIGITAL LTD AND OTHERS v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1128
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1217/2020

The defendant's application to compel disclosure of Security Information was dismissed because the court lacked jurisdiction to reopen and vary the prior order made on 19 November 2020 under the heads relied upon, no exceptional circumstances justified review prior to sealing, no material change of circumstances was established, and there is no statutory or common law power to compel plaintiffs to provide passcodes or encryption keys.
8 Jan 2021

TSYV v. LWSV

Citation

[2020] HKFC 273
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC12681/2014

Court granted the Mother's application for leave to file and serve a further expert psychological report and ordered that supervised access continue until further order; the Court held that uplift of supervised access is not automatic upon an expert's recommendation but is subject to Court approval, that experts cannot usurp the Court's functions, and that leave to adduce further expert evidence is justified on the facts and procedural principles balancing justice and case management.
21 Mar 2019

KUNG KWOK WAI DAVID, THE EXECUTOR OF THE LAST WILL OF KUNG WONG SAU HIN, DECEASED v. THE COMMISSIONER OF ESTATE DUTY

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 788
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCED1/2011

Paragraphs 16–23 of the 8th Affidavit of David Kung and exhibit DK-64 were struck out because they were not responsive to the 4th Affirmation of Ip Mei Ching, were outside the scope of the leave granted by the September Order and related to a prospective, unmade variation application; paragraphs 36–42 of the 9th Affirmation of Lily Fenn and exhibits LF-38 to LF-42 were not struck out because they related to costs of prior litigation which may be relevant to the alleged debts, but their use is confined to the issue of costs and subject to trial judge directions; the subsequently filed 9th Affi…