Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Presumption of paternity

Legal area

Court

12 Sept 2025

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. FC AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4250
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD7/2025

On the balance of probabilities the husband’s presumption of paternity was rebutted (mother untraceable, birth certificate left blank, mother’s account that husband was not the biological father and lack of evidence of his involvement). The mother has abandoned and neglected the infant, is unfit and untraceable; adoption is in the infant's best interests (including sibling placement considerations) and delay would prejudice the infant. Accordingly the mother's consent can be dispensed with and the infant may be freed for adoption.
29 Apr 2022

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LYS AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1266
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAD14/2021

Adoption was held to be in the best interests of TCKI; the mother had abandoned and neglected the child and her consent was unreasonably withheld and therefore could be dispensed with under the Adoption Ordinance; the putative father was not a parent for consent purposes and consent from him was not required.
30 Apr 2019

CHOW CHUN KIT, the personal representative of the estate of CHOW WING CHEUK v. CHOW PO YUEN, a minor by PANG ZHENG YUN, her guardian ad litem

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1112
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1455/2014

The court accepted the joint DNA test report as authentic and reliable and found the son administrator discharged the burden of rebutting the statutory presumption of paternity under s5(1)(b) Cap 429; accordingly the infant was not established as a natural child of the deceased and the son administrator succeeded in both HCMP 1400/2014 and HCMP 1455/2014.
6 Sept 2013

THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. HSP

Citation

THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. HSP
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP598/2013

On the evidence before the court, notably the mother's sworn declarations and the absence of contradicting evidence from Mr Huang, the presumption that Mr Huang was the biological father of HY, YY and M is rebutted on a balance of probabilities; consequently Mr Huang is not a person whose consent is required under s5(5)(a) of the Adoption Ordinance and no dispensation order is necessary in respect of those children.

Hong Kong Case Law

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. FC AND ANOTHER

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. LYS AND ANOTHER

CHOW CHUN KIT, the personal representative of the estate of CHOW WING CHEUK v. CHOW PO YUEN, a minor by PANG ZHENG YUN, her guardian ad litem

THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. HSP