Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Decree nisi and decree absolute

Legal area

Court

14 Apr 2014

TCWF v. LKKS

Citation

TCWF v. LKKS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV154/2012

The Court held that on proper construction of s28AA MPPO interest accrues from the date specified for payment in the maintenance order; Section 25 does not operate to prevent interest accruing from that payment date where the court has the power to specify or antedate payment under its appellate powers. Applying its discretion (s13(4) HCO/Order 59 R10), the Court antedated the lump sum payment to 1 December 2011, awarded interest at the judgment rate (8%) on the unpaid balance, and ordered limited redactions to the Main Judgment.
9 Aug 2012

CFF v. ZWJ

Citation

CFF v. ZWJ
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC12016/2010

The court granted the respondent leave to appeal out of time on condition (notice lodged within 7 days and appeal set down expeditiously) because there was material non-disclosure in the petitioner's affidavit, contact evidence showing the respondent may have been unaware of the divorce, and the respondent demonstrated arguable prospects and explained delay; however the court added a postscript expressing doubt about its jurisdiction to grant leave against a decree nisi and the implications for leave against a decree absolute.
7 Jul 2008

LSW v. LMYM

Citation

LSW v. LMYM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1041/2008

Leave to appeal was dismissed because section 14(3)(d) of the High Court Ordinance and the circumstances (applicant had time and opportunity to appeal the decree nisi and had unsuccessfully appealed) render the present application misconceived and an abuse of process; applicant's grounds were unarguable and previously rejected; the court will consider exercising its inherent jurisdiction to strike out the pending related appeal and to impose RPO/RAO against the applicant.
3 Jun 2003

LCM v. LYY

Citation

LCM v. LYY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV445/2002

Where a decree absolute was procured by a false affirmation supporting substituted service and the absent spouse had in fact no time or opportunity to appeal the decree nisi, the Court of Appeal will allow an appeal and set aside the decree nisi and decree absolute; s.14(3)(d) HCO does not bar the appeal in those circumstances and the proper remedy in this case was an appeal to the Court of Appeal rather than re‑hearing or fresh action because of s.18 MCO.

Hong Kong Case Law

TCWF v. LKKS

CFF v. ZWJ

LSW v. LMYM

LCM v. LYY