Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Non‑matrimonial property

  • 28 Aug 2023

    丘 對 張

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 169
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC316/2018

    Court found the Kwun Tong property had become matrimonial by reason of use as the matrimonial home and was therefore divisible; wife was found to be a family child's carer and had undeclared earnings/assets which justified an adverse inference; balancing marriage duration, short period of full cohabitation, non‑matrimonial origin of the property and wife’s concealment, court departed from equal sharing and awarded wife 35% of property value (HK$1,102,500) payable as lump sum within six months of final divorce order and monthly maintenance HK$2,000 until that sum is paid (with prior interim or…

  • 17 Mar 2023

    CHN v. CCY

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 48
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1755/2020

    The court excluded the alleged Parental Loans and Trust Money as enforceable liabilities for these proceedings (finding them gifts/soft loans and the supporting documents post‑event and unconvincing); identified total net joint assets of HKD13700232; assessed W’s reasonable monthly need at HKD90,000 (earning capacity HKD130,000) and H’s need at HKD20,000 (earning capacity HKD15–20k); held W’s conduct was not so gross and obvious as to justify departure from equal sharing; awarded H needs-based provision for five years on a clean break (full for two years and half for three years) and converte…

  • 7 Oct 2022

    LPM v. LKH

    Citation
    [2022] HKFC 214
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC844/2019

    Court found on the evidence substantial intermingling and joint participation in acquisition and management of the principal properties so 46F, 21G and 51E are included in the matrimonial asset pool; the HK$2M mortgage on 46F is a family liability; W had made an exceptional financial contribution by receiving and deploying large gifts from Mr E but H had made valid contributions; applying s.7 the sharing principle applies with a significant departure from equality justified by W's special contribution and short marriage: total net assets HK$24,299,953.59, set aside HK$8,776,000 for the child'…

  • 15 Oct 2021

    CPGK v. TMSK

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 189
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC16628/2017

    Leave to appeal was refused and stay dismissed because the applicant's out-of-time filing lacked adequate explanation; he failed to discharge the onus to show beneficial ownership or to adduce timely evidence despite multiple directions and opportunities; there was no reasonable or arguable prospect of success on the grounds advanced and no exceptional circumstances to justify a stay.

  • 17 Jun 2021

    NWSA v. CTYT

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 119
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC11524/2017

    Judge held that US$564,405 of the securities account represented third‑party interests and was excluded from the matrimonial asset pool; the four withdrawals for medical and insurance expenses were family expenditures and not added back; Flat 8A was excluded from distribution as non‑matrimonial property bought and held for H's mother and brother pre‑marriage; remaining matrimonial assets were to be split equally (subject to orders) and H was ordered to pay children's maintenance of HK$88,000 per month; costs ordered to respondent (H).

  • 17 Jun 2021

    NWSA v. CTYT

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 119
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC15494/2016

    Court found sufficient contemporaneous evidence to exclude US$564,405 as belonging to third parties and to remove Flat 8A from the matrimonial pool because it was purchased pre-marriage and intended for H's mother/brother; withdrawals for medical and insurance expenses were ordinary family expenditure (no add-back) and redacted settlement correspondence could not be relied upon as an admission to repay; W failed to adduce expert evidence to substantiate lifelong caregiving incapacity; after excluding identified items, remaining matrimonial assets divided equally between parties (save for spec…

  • 18 May 2021

    CPGK v. TMSK

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 79
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC16628/2017

    Court adopted a needs-based assessment and the telescoped approach to adjust sharing from a 50/50 yardstick because the Mei Foo property was non-matrimonial but available to meet needs; quantified the wife's and child's needs at HK$2,716,684.80 and ordered the husband to pay that lump sum within three months of decree absolute (subject to first charge of Legal Aid Director); ordered HK$3,000 per month child maintenance; made costs order nisi for husband to pay 80% of wife's costs.

  • 17 Nov 2020

    毛 對 朱及另二人

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 233
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC12153/2017

    Applying s.7(1) and the sharing principle as explained in LKW v DD and White v White, the court identified and valued the assets, assessed respective needs and earning capacities, found no special contribution or conduct warranting departure from equality sufficient to justify a major deviation, and ordered a near-equal division of matrimonial assets by awarding 45% to husband and 55% to wife with sale of the matrimonial home and retention of the mainland property by the wife to meet needs; husband to pay the monetary equalisation sum of HK$280,480 to wife within 14 days of receipt of sale pr…

  • 23 Mar 2020

    鄧 對 陳

    Citation
    [2020] HKFC 37
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCJA3955/2014

    Applying s.7 and the authorities the court assessed assets and needs, concluded the wife's disclosure was incomplete (reducing her credibility), excluded the father's post-separation inheritance from the matrimonial pool, applied the sharing principle to the matrimonial assets that derived from the marriage, held equal sharing appropriate overall, but preserved occupation for wife and child until the daughter is 25; consequently the husband was ordered to pay revised monthly maintenance (HK$9,600 spousal; HK$6,400 child), a lump sum balancing payment of HK$251,330, and the matrimonial home to…

  • 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…