Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Periodical maintenance

Legal area

Court

4 Nov 2015

LWL v. LMF

Citation

LWL v. LMF
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC14442/2012

The court found the respondent to be the overall more successful party at trial, the petitioner had failed to give full and frank disclosure and failed to respond to the respondent's without prejudice/Calderbank proposals (notably the 20 December 2013 proposal which was close to the eventual outcome); balancing these factors against the respondent's earlier attempt to secure a larger share, the court exercised its discretion to vary the order nisi and awarded costs to the respondent from 20 December 2013 inclusive, taxed on party and party basis if not agreed, with no order as to costs before…
29 Jan 2015

YYK V. TSCJ (now known as TKW)

Citation

YYK V. TSCJ (now known as TKW)
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC5141/2010

Court found on balance that the HK$600,000 was held on trust for the Wife's father and not matrimonial; the Husband had materially failed to disclose assets and owned an ABC (RMB) bank account and other undisclosed transactions totalling HK$1,898,088 which, together with disclosed assets and sale proceeds, yielded total matrimonial assets of approx. HK$2,718,000; applying the sharing principle with a justified 10% departure in favour of the Wife, the court awarded the Wife 60% (HK$1,627,200) as lump sum and periodical payments of HK$15,000 per month, ordered costs to the Wife and granted a s1…
22 Jan 2013

IDC v. SSA

Citation

IDC v. SSA
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP158/2011

The court held that s.10(2)(a) GMO does not empower a court to order a lump sum for the long‑term purchase of accommodation because that provision is limited to immediate and non‑recurring needs or to meeting past liabilities; and s.10(2)(e) is limited to property to which the parent is already entitled so the court cannot order a parent to purchase and settle a new property for the child. Consequently the Mother’s claim for a lump sum to buy a property and for settlement of a new property failed for lack of jurisdiction. The court nevertheless exercised its discretion to make periodical main…
1 Jun 2012

D,AS then known as R,JP v. D,SKR

Citation

D,AS then known as R,JP v. D,SKR
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC11559/2010

Given insufficient reliable evidence of husbands own assets and uncertain continuing support from his family, the court accepted the practical offer available from the husbands family and ordered a one‑off lump sum of HK$1,600,000 to the wife as full and final capital settlement, required the husband to return the wifes jewellery and to continue paying the childs school fees, and preserved the wifes ability to claim in future by awarding nominal periodical maintenance of HK$1 per annum; a costs order nisi was also made. The court refused to order more than the concrete third‑party provis…
22 Jun 2009

LLY v. LKY

Citation

LLY v. LKY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP970/2009

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because the short delay was explainable but the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospect of success: the trial judge's discretionary orders and factual findings were supported by the evidence and not demonstrably wrong. The Court therefore denied leave and made an order under O.59 r.2A(8) preventing an oral reconsideration inter partes.
15 Apr 1997

WONG SIN YEE v. CHEUNG SI YAN

Citation

WONG SIN YEE v. CHEUNG SI YAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV222/1996

The trial judge lawfully applied the section 7 factors, properly balanced the wife's immediate and long‑term needs against the husband's resources and prospects, and reached a reasonable discretionary division (deferred 25% equity charge plus maintenance and provident fund share); there was no error of law or principle warranting appellate intervention, and the costs orders were a proper exercise of judicial discretion.
17 Jan 1991

CHEUNG WONG KIM CHING ESTHER v. CHEUNG CHAI KONG

Citation

CHEUNG WONG KIM CHING ESTHER v. CHEUNG CHAI KONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV140/1990

Appeal allowed in part. The District Judge wrongly applied the Wachtel approach to reduce periodical maintenance where the wife was already a joint beneficial owner of the matrimonial flat; the correct approach is to apply the statutory s7 factors, use the one-third rule as a flexible starting point and the net effect method to adjust. On that basis periodical maintenance payable by the husband to the wife increased to HKD 5,600 per month (and HKD 2,000 for the younger daughter) effective 1 September 1990; interim maintenance remains operative until that date. The judge’s recorded reasons fel…
11 Mar 1983

ROBERT YUNG PAK LIANG v. LENA YUNG DAI MING

Citation

ROBERT YUNG PAK LIANG v. LENA YUNG DAI MING
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC309/1980

Appeal limited to issues in the notice; where s.7 factors and evidence show the wife cannot reasonably be expected to be self-supporting, maintenance must reflect that and not be reduced to coerce employment; given the Registrar's findings and husband's nondisclosure, maintenance should be increased to $4,500 per month and costs awarded to the wife; the court will not entertain challenge to the lump sum where not in the notice of appeal.
21 Jul 1978

SIU CHOW TONG v. SIU CHENG SHUI YING

Citation

SIU CHOW TONG v. SIU CHENG SHUI YING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMC1/1977

Because the petitioner failed to make full disclosure and had recently sold a flat for $120,000 with no adequate explanation for the application of the proceeds, the court drew an adverse inference as to his means and concluded he had capacity to pay reasonable maintenance; the petitioner was ordered to pay the respondent HKD 400 per month, commencing 31 July 1978, with costs to the respondent to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.