13 Oct 2022
The summons to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the Husband was not the overall successful party on the appeal, his success was limited, and there was no inconsistency in standards applied; costs remain a matter of judicial discretion and the normal rule that costs follow the event applies to the variation application, so the Husband must pay the Wife's costs of that application.
12 Nov 2019
Applying s63A(2) and the broad‑brush standard for maintenance pending suit, the Court concluded the husband had no reasonable prospect of success challenging the MPS award of HK$60,000 monthly, set‑off and backdating issues (leave refused) but allowed leave to appeal on the narrower issue of litigation funding because it raised arguable points and fresh evidence questions; stay of execution was refused and MPS payment must continue pending appeal.
18 Sept 2019
Judge assessed disclosed incomes and budgets, reduced the wife's claimed household and child expenses to reasonable levels (child needs assessed at HK$16,000/month), apportioned household and child costs on a 60:40 split (husband 60%), and concluded the husband can afford short term provision; ordered interim maintenance of HK$18,500 per month payable from 1 October 2019, refused to backdate payments and refused the additional HK$6,000 lump sum for furniture, and made an order nisi for costs.
1 Mar 2019
Leave granted to discharge the mutual undertaking to accept HK$12,000 due to material and unforeseeable change in rental/market circumstances; on a broad‑brush assessment of evidence the father’s periodical payment was varied from HK$35,000 to HK$53,000 per month commencing 1 April 2019 after reallocation of budget heads; father’s proposed increase of life insurance to HK$10m was dismissed given existing security (Mei Foo Property) and means; backdated shortfall from the date of the summons (31 March 2016) for 36 months was calculated at HK$648,000 and ordered payable within one month; undert…
11 May 2018
Given the marital standard of living and deficiencies in the fathers disclosure the court ordered a 50:50 division of the reasonable monthly expenses for the two children, resulting in an interim maintenance order requiring the father to pay HK$29,000 per child per month (HK$58,000 total), backdated to 1 August 2017 with a lump sum payment of HK$580,000, and awarded costs to the mother (order nisi).
27 Apr 2018
Applying a broad‑brush approach and finding the respondent's disclosure deficient and that he had assets/means despite claiming unemployment, the court varied the MPS Order: respondent ordered to pay an additional HK$52,000 per month (HK$12,000 rent + HK$40,000 school fees) in addition to the existing MPS payments; the school fees component was backdated to 1 July 2017 and respondent ordered to pay the backdated sum of HK$400,000 within 28 days; ongoing payments to be made on the 1st of each month until further order; payments to be credited to petitioner's bank account; penal notice and pers…
20 Oct 2017
On the interim applications the court accepted the wife's need and limited disclosure by the husband justified robust assumptions; ordered husband to pay the wife HK$15,000 per month as maintenance pending suit (not backdated), ordered interim maintenance for each child at HK$25,000 per month (HK$20,250 for fees plus HK$4,750 for other expenses) with backdating to August 2016 for the elder child and January 2017 for the younger, ordered litigation funding of HK$25,000 per month to be paid to the wife's solicitors backdated to December 2015 until the Financial Dispute Resolution hearing, and m…
5 May 2017
Applying a broad‑brush assessment the court found the marital standard to be comfortable middle class, treated the HS joint account and likely maternal support as available interim resources, rejected wilful non‑disclosure by the wife and backdating, and concluded the wife's reasonable interim accommodation and living needs are $30,000 per month; awarded MPS of $30,000 p.m. from 5 May 2017 and discharged the prior interim undertaking.