Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Consent order variation

Legal area

Court

7 Mar 2025

WELLY GRACE LTD AND OTHERS v. KEUNG YEE MAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 956
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA649/2023

The application was allowed because the consent injunction did not embody a binding contractual bargain immune from variation (the 9th Defendant had not genuinely contested the injunction), the order was expressly subject to further court order, the proposed payment into court is benign and preserves plaintiffs' recourse so is not abusive, and there was no significant prejudice to plaintiffs; costs were ordered to plaintiffs to pay the 9th Defendant HK$60,000 (summary assessment).
12 Apr 2022

CWYJ v. LTYE

Citation

[2022] HKFC 65
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC1135/2016

Court found respondent retained sufficient resources and realistic prospect of third‑party assistance and future earnings; respondent had exaggerated expenses and had access to parents' and wife's support; consent order was entered with advice and must be upheld unless good cause shown. Accordingly variation to reduce periodical payment modestly was justified but not to the extent sought by respondent; ordered periodical payment of HKD10,000 per month and monthly lump‑sum instalment of HKD32,000 from 1 September 2020, discharged family car undertaking and offset prior payments; respondent to…
29 Oct 2021

M v. C

Citation

[2021] HKFC 220
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC8147/2014

The District Judge exercised discretion to refuse leave to appeal out of time because the Father failed to show a reasonable prospect of success on any proposed ground. The Judge found the applicable legal principles (including s.11(7) MPPO and AEM-related principles) had been considered and applied, that the Father had not discharged evidential burdens (including disclosure of assets), and that delay was unjustified; accordingly, there was no other reason in the interests of justice to grant leave.
18 Dec 2020

SHW v. SCKR also known as CKR

Citation

[2020] HKFC 262
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC611/2014

The petitioner was not permitted to be discharged from or vary his undertaking given in the 2014 consent order because he failed to establish any proper ground for discharge or set-aside (no fraud, mistake or non-disclosure; change of mind and changed circumstances did not make performance infeasible); accordingly the court ordered the CBC membership be surrendered and reissued under CBC Articles and the debenture proceeds paid to the Respondent, with costs to follow the event.
28 Aug 2019

WYM v. LYW AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKFC 221
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC14114/2015

The Intervener failed to demonstrate any legitimate reason, change of circumstances or sufficient cause to set aside a consent Joinder Order or to justify a stay; the Joinder Directions, obtained by consent and complying with the TL v. ML procedure, must stand; the Family Court is an appropriate forum to determine beneficial interests and manage any consequent order for sale under MPPO with proceeds dealt with by the Family Court; costs follow the event.
3 Aug 2017

WONG MAN KIN v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (for and on behalf of the Director of Highways) AND ANOTHER

Citation

WONG MAN KIN v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (for and on behalf of the Director of Highways) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI947/2013

Leave to adduce the two experts was refused because the proposed expert opinions were unnecessary to resolve the disputed factual issues (the condition of the road could not be reliably opined upon from the available objective material and many issues were matters of common sense or primary fact for the court to decide); however, the court held it had jurisdiction under Order 38 r.44 to vary a prior consent order if sufficient cause and admissible expert evidence were shown.
21 Feb 2017

胡對蔣

Citation

胡對蔣
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC14129/2005

The prior delay for the son's education had been effectively honored and the son had ceased full‑time tertiary study and repeatedly failed to obtain medical admission; the wife's housing and financial needs could be met from her substantial share of sale proceeds and by available maintenance provisions; therefore it was just and appropriate to order sale with conditions. The court exercised its power under Cap.192 s.6A to make a further order requiring vacant possession within six months and sale at market price not below HKD5,300,000 with proceeds distributed under the 2008 consent order.
15 Aug 2013

LSLR v. LHW

Citation

LSLR v. LHW
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC10819/2002

On the balance of probabilities the judge accepted the husband\'s income had fallen (from around HK$60,000 to just under HK$40,000 a month) but found he remained able to contribute; the wife has income and assets and must maximise earning capacity; fairness required a reduction in wife\'s maintenance but not to zero, resulting in maintenance fixed at HK$3,500 per month backdated to 1 August 2012, with child maintenance of HK$3,000 to continue.
13 Nov 1985

OVERSEAS TRUST BANK LTD v. CHANG LEE SIAN AND OTHERS

Citation

OVERSEAS TRUST BANK LTD v. CHANG LEE SIAN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3780/1985

The consent injunction of 21 June 1985, including the savings in paragraph 4, was expressed to operate "until further order" and therefore the court had jurisdiction to vary it; given the 3rd defendant's admitted substantial US bank account accessible for his subsistence, the court should delete paragraph 4(b) to prevent dissipation of assets within the jurisdiction; the plaintiff did not enter the order under a relevant mistake and the onus did not lie on the defendant to disclose his foreign accounts at that stage, but the existence of the foreign accounts justified variation of the injunct…