Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abandonment and neglect

Legal area

Court

2 Feb 2024

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LPK

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 421
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD34/2023

Adoption is in the best interests of the two infants given their young age, stable health and need for permanent family placements; the mother has abandoned and neglected the infants and unreasonably withholds consent; therefore the statutory grounds for dispensing with her consent are established on the balance of probabilities and her consent is dispensed with, subject to the court's directions regarding sibling human rights inquiry.
2 Feb 2024

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LPK

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 421
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD33/2023

The court found that adoption was in the best interests of the two infants, that the mother had abandoned and neglected them and unreasonably withheld consent, and that in all the circumstances her consent ought to be dispensed with; the court nevertheless made procedural directions including appointing the Official Solicitor to investigate siblings' human rights and adjourned the originating summonses for further steps rather than making final adoption orders immediately.
26 Apr 2023

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. HKL AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1123
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD6/2023

On the evidence the court found on the balance of probabilities that the presumption of paternity of the 2nd respondent was rebutted; that adoption was in the infant's best interests under the Adoption Checklist; and that the 1st respondent had abandoned and neglected the infant such that his consent under s5(5)(a) could be dispensed with under ss5A and 6(1) of the Adoption Ordinance; accordingly the infant was declared free for adoption.
17 Mar 2023

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LPK

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 802
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD26/2022

Adoption is in the infant's best interests because she requires a stable permanent family and institutional care is unsuitable long term; the mother has abandoned and neglected the infant and unreasonably withheld consent; therefore under the Adoption Ordinance the mother's consent is properly dispensed with and the infant is declared free for adoption.
29 Apr 2022

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LYS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1265
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD13/2021

On balance of probabilities the presumption that the 3rd Defendant was the father was rebutted; adoption was found to be in the best interests of LTH because permanent adoptive care outweighs limited and distant sibling ties; the mother and putative father had abandoned and neglected LTH and the mother’s asserted plans were inadequate and uncertain, therefore it was reasonable to dispense with their consent and to free LTH for adoption.
8 Sept 2020

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. YPC

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2290
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP705/2020

Because the putative father, after expressing an intention to assert paternal rights, failed to take any steps over a prolonged period, ignored correspondence and did not pursue legal remedies (including while in custody), the court found he had effectively abandoned any rights and that, in all the circumstances, his consent could be dispensed with under s6(1); accordingly an order was made under s5A(1) declaring the child free for adoption, subject to further safeguards for the child's best interests including separate representation and updated reports.
6 Nov 2015

D v. 王 AND ANOTHER

Citation

D v. 王 AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1566/2015

On the evidence (letters of authorization, disappearance of parents, police certificate of missing person, public notices and other tracing efforts) the court was satisfied the parents had abandoned or neglected the child and could not be found despite reasonably practicable steps; accordingly their consents were properly dispensed with under ss5A and 6(1) and freeing the child for adoption was in the child's best interests.
17 Sept 2012

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. DTTH

Citation

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. DTTH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1841/2008

The Mother was objectively withholding consent unreasonably because of persistent neglect, failure to establish a stable and drug-free lifestyle, lack of childcare ability or plan, absence and failure to maintain contact, all of which prejudiced the Infant's manifest best interests; accordingly the court was justified under s6(1) to dispense with her consent and free the Infant for adoption.
18 Nov 2011

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. WMY

Citation

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. WMY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1292/2011

The evidence established abandonment and neglect of C and D by the mother and that all reasonably practicable steps had been taken to locate her; therefore statutory grounds in section 6(1)(a) and (c) were satisfied and the court properly dispensed with the mother’s consent as adoption was in the children’s best interests.
14 Aug 2006

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. L

Citation

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. L
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP972/2006

Applying the objective test of reasonableness set out in W (An Infant), the court found the parents' prolonged absence, failure to engage meaningfully, their disabilities' effect on parenting, unsuitable living conditions and lack of realistic prospect of providing a safe family environment meant the mother's consent was unreasonably withheld; in this exceptional case the court dispensed with consent and declared the children free for adoption and granted the father rights as if legitimate under s.3(d).