Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Compensation for relationship‑generated disadvantage

Legal area

Court

12 Apr 2024

EBS v. NTCD

Citation

[2024] HKCA 335
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV543/2021

The Court dismissed the wife's appeal because the compensation point was not properly raised at trial and the trial judge's apportionment fell within her broad discretion under s.7 MPPO; the Court granted the husband's cross‑appeal in part, exercising jurisdiction under Barder principles because the wife's prolonged, deliberate non‑compliance with the vacate order falsified a fundamental assumption of the ancillary award and caused quantifiable loss, and ordered the wife to pay to the husband a sum representing 12 months' rent at HK$143,600 per month less a credit for reduced child maintenanc…
20 Sept 2019

SSLT v. SMFC

Citation

[2019] HKFC 250
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC11056/2017

The court applied the LKW v DD stepwise approach: after ascertaining resources (with a 50% liquidity discount on pensions), it found surplus assets and applied the sharing principle with departures for fairness. It treated half of the husbands post-separation discretionary bonus and half of the deferred share payment as matrimonial, excluded pre-marital securities and pensions as non-matrimonial on the facts, allowed a 5% uplift of the matrimonial share to the wife by way of compensation for relationship-generated disadvantage, ordered a capital clean-break lump sum of HKD 7,366,200 to the w…
24 Nov 2014

YN also known as YN(A) v. NA

Citation

YN also known as YN(A) v. NA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV236/2013

The Court of Appeal dismissed the wife's appeal, holding the trial judge's broad factual findings and round figures for the asset pool were within discretion; the 70% allocation to the wife together with a lump sum and ten years' periodical payments appropriately satisfied need, sharing and compensation in context of the available assets; limited term periodical payments and the judge's valuations were not plainly wrong; the sealed order arithmetic required amendment to reflect the figures the trial judge used (implementation sum JPY71,303,000).
12 Nov 2010

WLK v. TMC

Citation

WLK v. TMC
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV21/2009

The Court allowed the husband's appeal in part: the Court of Appeal had erred in substituting the trial judge's findings on most disputed family liabilities and in treating the pre-marital relationship as a 15-year continuous union based on 'emotional interlocking' alone; the sharing principle applies where assets exceed needs, but in this case modest allowances for compensation and contribution (3% and 2% of total assets respectively) plus an adjusted needs-based award produced a fair outcome; after set-offs and the wife's own assets the husband was ordered to pay a net lump sum of HK$11,900…
12 Nov 2010

LKW v. DD

Citation

LKW v. DD
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV16/2008

C v C is overruled; when applying section 7 MPPO courts should adopt the White v White / Miller/McFarlane framework: ascertain assets, assess needs (often dispositive), if surplus apply an equal‑sharing yardstick and depart only for good reason after considering source of assets, duration, contributions, conduct (only if obvious and gross) and compensation (generally intrinsic to sharing); apply broad‑brush discretion and articulate reasons for any departure from equality.
14 Jul 2008

K v. C

Citation

K v. C
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC5508/2005

The court found the marriage to be short with no seamless pre-marital cohabitation to extend its duration; the wife's claim for compensation for a foregone concert career was speculative and not established; alleged family loans were examined and certain intra-family liabilities were not treated as immediate enforceable liabilities for asset calculation; applying needs (generously interpreted) rather than sharing or compensation the wife's capitalised needs and deductions produced a fair settlement: transfer of the Federal Hill property and a lump sum of 4.25 million (currency units used in j…

Hong Kong Case Law

EBS v. NTCD

SSLT v. SMFC

YN also known as YN(A) v. NA

WLK v. TMC

LKW v. DD

K v. C