Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Variation of maintenance order

  • 16 Jun 2023

    劉 對 盧

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 115
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13682/2009

    Application to vary the consent maintenance order was dismissed because the respondent failed to demonstrate a material and unforeseeable change in circumstances; his evidence lacked credibility and full disclosure, there was cogent evidence of continued assets, cash flows and deliberate transfers (notably insurance purchases) sufficient to meet maintenance obligations, and adverse inferences were drawn from non-disclosure; thus the consent order should stand and costs awarded against respondent.

  • 1 Jun 2023

    張 對 李

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 147
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2786/2019

    Applying Cap.192 s11(7) and the broad‑brush approach, the court accepted some increases in specific items (domestic helper, tutoring/extracurricular, childcare), corrected and reconciled Form E figures, fixed the child's reasonable monthly expenditure at HKD11,200 and ordered the husband to pay half (HKD5,600) per month from 1 July 2023; the variation was justified and affordable to the husband.

  • 31 Mar 2023

    李 對 楊

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 67
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13257/2018

    Applicant failed to discharge the burden to show a material adverse change: his disclosed income did not fall since the consent order (tax returns and recent disclosure show monthly income around HK$46,400–52,160), his remarriage and new child do not justify reducing obligations to former family, and his spending and gambling conduct undermine his case; application to vary maintenance is dismissed.

  • 21 Apr 2021

    KYK v. MSMSC

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 76
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC8842/2009

    Applying s11 MPPO and the statutory child maintenance factors in s5 and s7(2), accepting the mother's adjusted and supported expense figures and her evidence regarding the father's means (including property and ongoing restaurant business), and having regard to the father's non-disclosure and non-appearance, the court found the father able to pay increased maintenance and awarded specified monthly sums for each child and costs to the respondent.

  • 4 Feb 2021

    鄭 對 黃

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 31
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC15264/2010

    The court accepted the applicant’s dismissal in June 2019 as a non‑voluntary, material and substantial change in circumstances for a 66‑year‑old; the respondent failed to adduce evidence to rebut the dismissal or to prove concealment of assets; applying Cap.192 s11 and relevant authorities, the consent order of 26/4/2011 was varied to a symbolic payment to preserve the respondent’s rights while reflecting the applicant’s lack of means, with effect from July 2019.

  • 4 Sept 2020

    CWYJ v. LTYE

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 182
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1135/2016

    The court found on the evidence that the respondent had unequivocally relocated to Singapore, declared intention to remain there, ignored court attendance obligations, and given his payment history and substantial arrears, there was a real risk he would not return and enforcement of the consent order would be obstructed or delayed; accordingly the discretion required extending the prohibition order and dismissing the discharge application.

  • 9 Apr 2020

    TWF v. HWKR

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 84
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7615/2019

    On a broad brush assessment the husband demonstrated sufficient ability to pay because of additional sale proceeds (Second and Third Payments), routine overseas lifestyle and borrowing capacity; the wifes wide-ranging increase claims lacked evidential foundation and new bank loans did not qualify as maintenance; convert husband's food undertaking into a modest monetary allowance; accordingly vary Consent Order to increase maintenance marginally and restore legal costs provision for a limited period with payments to be on account of any final award.

  • 8 Nov 2019

    凌 對 黃

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 284
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC16504/2014

    The court found applicant's circumstances had materially changed after 2017 (reduced earning capacity and new family commitments) but also noted applicant's inconsistent payments and disposable income; balancing needs and means the court reduced the periodical child maintenance from HK$9,000 to HK$5,700 per month effective 1 January 2018, calculated arrears for Jan 2018–Oct 2019 at HK$125,400 less payments of HK$40,000 leaving arrears of HK$85,400, and ordered that arrears be repaid at HK$700 per month starting 1 December 2019 while current maintenance is due monthly in advance.

  • 19 Sept 2019

    黃 對 張

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 242
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC9024/2010

    The court found there was a material change in circumstances (applicant's retirement and daughters returning to applicant's home) but respondent retained assets (mainland property and some investments) and was given a limited period to realise those assets and seek income; accordingly the maintenance of HK$3,400 per month should continue temporarily until 1 January 2020, after which the order is discharged; arrears of HK$78,200 are payable within 14 days.

  • 22 Mar 2019

    梁 對 谷

    Citation
    [2019] HKFC 73
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4920/2004

    The court accepted the statutory multi-factorial assessment under Cap.192 and, on balancing the payer's proven income, reasonable expenses and self-inflicted indebtedness against the recipient's needs and the child’s needs, concluded the proper adjustment was a modest reduction of HKD500 per month; debts and asserted future unemployment did not justify a larger reduction. The variation takes effect from June 2017.