Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Arrears

  • 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.

  • 4 Sept 2017

    WHW v. CWK

    Citation
    WHW v. CWK
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC16044/2009

    The court held the husband liable for HK$50,500 as arrears to the daughter: voluntary overpayments to the wife could not be set off against the daughter's arrears because there was no contemporaneous agreement or precondition permitting such set-off; the husband must pay the specified arrears and costs within prescribed time frames.

  • 27 Nov 2015

    HUANG PUI YING v. UGBE NGOZI KENNETH

    Citation
    HUANG PUI YING v. UGBE NGOZI KENNETH
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD2309/2015

    The Tribunal found the notice of termination validly served under section 62(3) and the respondent was bound by the signed tenancy agreement; the respondent's arguments were addressed at the hearing and his proposed appeal has no reasonable prospect of success under s11AA(6), therefore leave to appeal and a stay of execution are refused.

  • 2 Sept 2014

    SKP v. SAFM

    Citation
    SKP v. SAFM
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC5731/2010

    The child's actual monthly expenses were found to be about HK$47,533, yielding an equal parental share of approximately HK$23,766. Court rounded the father's maintenance obligation up to HK$24,000 per month and backdated the increase to 1 May 2013 given the change in practical arrangements after the father's relocation. Parties were released from the paragraph R consultation/50:50 undertakings and replaced with a fixed capitalised annual contribution by the father of HK$35,000 to cover extracurricular activities, extra tuition, school camps and trips, with all payments increased by 1% per ann…

  • 4 Aug 2014

    張寶珠 對 黎幗眉

    Citation
    張寶珠 對 黎幗眉
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD878/2014

    The tribunal held there was no actual tenancy because both parties lacked the intention to create and enforce a real landlord–tenant relationship; the written lease served other purposes related to redevelopment registration and both parties’ conduct (agreement to waive rent/deposit and failure to address rent payments) showed no intention to establish an operative tenancy, therefore no arrears arose.

  • 10 Jul 2013

    CWG v. MH AND OTHERS

    Citation
    CWG v. MH AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP643/2012

    The court found the husband in contempt of the MPS Order and paragraph 1 of the Order; the contempt was wilful, contumacious and impeded the course of justice; applying Hadkinson principles the court ordered that the husband would not be heard on his stay application unless and until he complied with specified proportionate conditions to purge contempt (undertakings and payment of specified arrears and costs); the preliminary question as to R2's entitlement to be heard was adjourned for consideration of waiver of the disclosure order.

  • 15 Aug 2012

    YY v. CHOA

    Citation
    YY v. CHOA
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC7598/2010

    Attachment was refused because the father's inability to pay was attributable to a shared history of financial mismanagement rather than wilful default; he accepted the maintenance obligation, offered a direct debit undertaking, and the court concluded attachment would risk his employment and was not warranted on the facts or under section 28 criteria.

  • 31 Jan 2007

    GE CAPITAL (HONG KONG) LTD v. NGAN TSE LEUNG

    Citation
    GE CAPITAL (HONG KONG) LTD v. NGAN TSE LEUNG
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP869/2006

    The appeal was dismissed because the Defendant failed to prove the alleged payments with any documentary evidence despite leave to do so; there was no contractual 45‑day grace period; at the time the originating summons was issued instalments for March and April were in arrear (March outstanding 53 days, April 22 days), thereby justifying the Registrar's order for payment and delivery of vacant possession.

  • 17 Apr 2004

    THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF SEA VIEW ESTATE v. ADSIN DEVELOPMENT LTD

    Citation
    THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF SEA VIEW ESTATE v. ADSIN DEVELOPMENT LTD
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDBM357/2003

    The Tribunal held that neither the DMC nor the Building Management Ordinance exempts owners from paying management fees where annual budgets were not prepared; because the management fees for 2000–2003 remained unchanged from earlier duly approved budgets, the Applicant validly demanded and was entitled to recover the arrears and interest under the DMC; the respondents' grounds of opposition failed.

  • 17 Apr 2004

    THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF SEA VIEW ESTATE v. ADSIN DEVELOPMENT LTD

    Citation
    THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF SEA VIEW ESTATE v. ADSIN DEVELOPMENT LTD
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDBM355/2003

    The Tribunal held that the respondents remained liable for management fees for January 2000–March 2004 because the fees remained unchanged from previously approved budgets for 1998–1999 and neither the DMC nor the Building Management Ordinance nullified the Applicant's demands; accordingly the respondents must pay specified arrears with interest and pay costs subject to costs orders nisi.