Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Conduct

  • 18 Jul 2024

    KKSR v. CLH aka ZL

    Citation
    [2024] HKFC 141
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13299/2019

    The judge found H gave unsatisfactory, evasive and dishonest evidence, failed deplorably in the duty of full and frank disclosure and failed to account for substantial sale proceeds and income; that misconduct met the high threshold for conduct to be taken into account under section 7; consequently the starting equal-division yardstick was displaced and a departure to 55% to W and 45% to H produced a fair outcome, together with specific orders (transfer of Cambodia property, equalization payment, secured child maintenance and costs in favour of W).

  • 1 Nov 2023

    BC v. MSH also known as H, MSO AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 222
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13741/2019

    Court found wife’s HKD 1,080,100 ATM withdrawals were explained as family and living expenses and not wanton or concealed so not added back; wife’s AUD125,000 withdrawal lacked satisfactory explanation and was added back; husband’s disclosure on crypto investments was unsatisfactory but the court accepted the investments were bona fide market losses and not wanton or reckless, so no add-back of initial crypto sums; Australian MPF treated as unilateral and carved out but Australian bank funds and AUD125,000 were not proven to be non-matrimonial (AUD125,000 added back); total matrimonial pot as…

  • 20 Aug 2021

    LWF v. WST

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 164
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC5380/2019

    The 26 loans (c.1,970,000 HKD) were family debts and the wife was aware of them; the husband's post‑separation loans from his brother (c.709,200 HKD) are bona fide liabilities of the husband; the husband's conduct did not meet the 'obvious and gross' threshold to justify departure from equal sharing; net matrimonial assets were assessed at HKD 17,569,427 and after liabilities and sale costs the net proceeds are to be split broadly 51.5% to the wife and 48.5% to the husband with the matrimonial home sold (not less than HKD 12,000,000) and specified liabilities paid first; no order as to costs…

  • 6 Aug 2020

    CSH v. LS or LS formerly known as CYY

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 143
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC12435/2016

    Court found Wife estopped from changing separation date (separation pre-1984), rejected add-back and resulting trust claims for assets held by W2 and X because threshold for wanton dissipation or intention to defeat was not met and no TL v ML third-party proceedings were pursued; declined to treat third-party assets as Husband resources under KEWS; identified total assets at about HK$53m (Husband HK$41.8m, Wife HK$11.2m); applied sharing principle but found no good reason to depart in Wife's favour and awarded the Wife a lump sum of HK$5,000,000 on a clean-break basis and ordered the Wife to…

  • 8 Aug 2007

    W v. C

    Citation
    W v. C
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2162/2006

    Having considered s.7 factors and evidence, the court concluded that both parties made broadly equal contributions, petitioner has sufficient earning capacity and son support, and respondent offered to transfer his entire interest; accordingly it was fair to order respondent to transfer his entire interest in the Chaiwan Property to petitioner on a clean break basis, dismiss ancillary claims for maintenance, allocate stamp duty to petitioner and each party to bear their own transfer costs, with the order nisi to become final after 21 days.

  • 27 Jun 2007

    L v. Y

    Citation
    L v. Y
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC12396/2006

    Applying s.7 MPPO factors the court found a clean break appropriate: wife's proven needs and limited current earning capacity justified limited short-term maintenance; husband's higher income and capability to pay justified continuing child maintenance; wife's allegations of debts were unproven or barred by earlier settlement; husband's conduct (adultery) was not 'obvious and gross' to deny provision. Therefore ordered transfer of husband's share in Tseung Kwan O to wife, limited spousal maintenance $10,000/month for 12 months, child maintenance $14,000/month until 18 or end of full-time educ…