Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Wardship

Legal area

Court

30 Jun 2025

WD ON BEHALF OF LNT (A MINOR) v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF HOSPITAL AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2741
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1460/2025

The detention was unlawful because no statutory provision in the PCJO or elsewhere authorised the Director/SWO to detain LNT or to block his discharge: the CP Order committed the child to the care of the mother (not to the SWO or an institution), supervision does not equate to authority to detain, and the Family Court's interim sole care and control order in favour of the father (served on the hospital) displaced any inconsistent juvenile court measures; accordingly habeas corpus relief was granted and LNT ordered released.
19 May 2025

WD v. LN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2025
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP338/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and was, in significant respects, academic: the non-removal restriction was necessary for the child's best interests given the defendant's intention to relocate the child; a Family Court Master had already made a similar non-removal order and the High Court had de-warded the child, rendering the interim-interim access order time-limited and moot; the defendant had been served with the plaintiff's skeleton argument and bundle and had been given an opportunity to be heard; the Leave Summons was unmerit…
10 Feb 2023

CCMJ v. SSM formerly known as SKL

Citation

[2023] HKFC 31
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP67/2010

The court refused to consider the father's late Form E filed in defiance of an unless order, found no legitimate grounds of opposition sufficient to defeat the mother's variation summons, and varied the child's maintenance from HK$13,726 to HK$35,726 per month effective 1/9/2022 (incorporating a HK$22,000 monthly rental top-up) while leaving the mother's carer's allowance at HK$10,000; costs were awarded to the mother for the father's procedural default.
23 Feb 2022

C AND ANOTHER v. A AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 556
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP607/2021

The Child was dewarded because there was no evidential basis that she required the protection of the High Court, the social investigation did not supply sufficient material to determine adoption, and the statutory scheme designates the District Court as the proper forum for applications under sections 23A and 5A of the Adoption Ordinance; accordingly transfer to the CFI and continuation of wardship were not justified.
26 Jan 2022

CCMJ v. SSM (formerly known as SKL)

Citation

[2022] HKCA 173
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV84/2021

The Father was in deliberate and continuing contempt for non-payment of maintenance and carer's allowance; that contempt materially impeded the course of justice and no other realistic and effective remedy existed. A proportionate Hadkinson order was therefore justified: the appeal and associated summons would not be heard unless the Father paid the specified outstanding sum of HKD 409,616 by 28 February 2022 and made the February 2022 monthly payments of HKD 13,726 (N) and HKD 10,000 (Mother) and continued to pay those monthly sums when due; failure to comply would result in the appeal and s…
30 Nov 2021

Mrs B AND ANOTHER v. THE OFFICIAL SOLICITOR AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR C

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 3534
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD8/2021

The court granted the adoption and dewarding because statutory requirements under s8 AO were satisfied: birth parents gave informed consent, the Applicants were found fit and proper by the Director and Official Solicitor, there was no payment in consideration of the adoption, and adoption was demonstrably in the best interests of C given long-term placement, strong bonding and the child's own wishes and maturity; procedural irregularities identified were remedied and did not justify refusal.
23 Sept 2021

S AND ANOTHER v. T

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2854
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP461/2021

Court held that all statutory conditions in section 12(1)-(6) PCO were satisfied, the Applicants acted in good faith, the payments (total approx HKD 310,000) were not disproportionate to reasonable expenses and/or were properly authorized retrospectively, and that the child's lifelong welfare required the making of a parental order; accordingly the parental order was made and payments authorized, with the child dewarded.
22 Jun 2021

LCG v. IK

Citation

[2021] HKFC 120
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP231/2019

Relocation was refused because, on balance and having regard to the paramountcy of the child's best interests, the risks from the father's poor communication, his past conduct, the real possibility of reduced maternal contact post-relocation, and the uncertainty as to enforceability of Hong Kong orders in the PRC outweighed the asserted benefits of relocation; consequently joint custody was ordered with care and control to the mother and the father's relocation and sole care/control application dismissed.
13 May 2021

BGPB v. KSW

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1366
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1922/2020

Hong Kong was the child's habitual residence and natural forum, the mother pursued parallel proceedings in Australia after Hong Kong proceedings commenced and engaged in conduct amounting to vexatious and oppressive litigation; accordingly a personam anti-suit injunction against the mother was necessary and proportionate to protect the Hong Kong court's determinations and the child's welfare.
1 Apr 2021

BGPB v. KSW

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 899
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1922/2020

Court held it had jurisdiction because childs habitual residence remained Hong Kong, Mother had not properly or timely challenged jurisdiction, and proceedings concerned local guardianship/wardship law; Father satisfied the C v S tests showing commitment, attachment and legitimate reasons, so under s.3(1)(d) GMO he was granted the rights and authority of a father as if the child were legitimate; joint custody and shared care and control ordered and child ordered to return to Hong Kong as being in the childs best interests.