Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Visitation

Legal area

Court

21 May 2026

譚對吳

Citation

[2026] HKCA 993
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP156/2025

The court refused leave to appeal because the father's grounds failed to show any obvious error of fact or principle in the trial judge's exercise of discretion: the 12‑month supervision order was a lawful, reasonable measure within the judge's assessment of the parties' communication and the child's welfare; social welfare reports are advisory; the custody award to the mother did not evidence a reversible error; and the application therefore lacked a reasonable prospect of success. Costs were awarded against the applicant.
24 Feb 2025

黎對凌

Citation

[2025] HKFC 31
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC17193/2014

Court accepted social welfare and clinical psychologist reports that there was no evidence mother deliberately alienated the child; the child, competent for his age, expressed a settled wish to live with mother; maintaining stability and status quo was in the child's best interests; therefore order varied to joint custody with mother having care and control and a defined contact regime for father, and limited travel permission for mother with safeguards.
28 Mar 2024

A 對 B

Citation

[2024] HKFC 65
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC4376/2019

The application for leave to appeal is refused because the proposed grounds lack a reasonable prospect of success: the applicant's factual assertions were contradicted by court records, the fresh evidence did not meet the Ladd v Marshall test and would not alter the outcome, and the social welfare reports provided a rational basis for awarding sole custody to the respondent; the high threshold for overturning discretionary family law decisions was not met.
21 Jan 2022

楊對姚

Citation

[2022] HKFC 20
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC13440/2018

The court accepted the social welfare investigation reports which recommended maintaining the status quo because the two children had adapted to living with the father, their welfare (including expressed wishes) and current stability favoured continuation of father’s care pending trial; accordingly the father was granted interim care and control and the mother interim defined access as detailed, and no costs order was made.
7 Oct 2021

黎對歐

Citation

[2021] HKFC 196
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC4228/2021

Sole guardianship and sole care and control were awarded to the father because maintaining the existing caregiving arrangement with the father and grandmother best served the children’s welfare: the mother lacked a credible, practical care plan, had a poor and antagonistic relationship with the children (particularly the son), and realistic parental cooperation was lacking, making joint guardianship contrary to the children’s best interests.
30 Dec 2020

陳對梁

Citation

[2020] HKFC 278
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC4979/2015

Leave to appeal refused because the mother's grounds lacked a reasonable prospect of success and there were no other compelling reasons to permit an appeal; the judge's original decision must stand because it was grounded on the child's best interests, the social worker's report that the child was well cared for and settled with the father, and the mother's lack of a realistic, supported care plan.
15 May 2020

吳對李

Citation

[2020] HKFC 99
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC14646/2016

Applying Cap.13 s3 and the social welfare reports, the court awarded sole custody (care and control) to the mother because the parents could not cooperate to make joint decisions (including medical treatment), welfare reports recommended maintaining mother's care, and the father's conduct included incidents of corporal punishment and neglect; the court preserved and specified defined access for the father (fortnightly overnight weekends) and ordered a shared 10:7 contribution by father to specified school-related expenses with receipts and payment deadlines; the earlier temporary maintenance…
11 Apr 2019

池對王

Citation

[2019] HKFC 95
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC15650/2016

The court found that maintaining the existing shared care arrangement best serves the child's welfare: both parents love and adequately care for the child, the social welfare report and the child's clear preference supported continuation, and the current division of weekday maternal care and weekend paternal care provides the optimal balance of routine and paternal engagement. Therefore joint care and control was ordered.
18 Jan 2019

何對温

Citation

[2019] HKFC 20
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC14391/2013

The summons for enforcement was dismissed because the applicant failed to produce sufficient and credible evidence that he had complied with the conditions of the consent order (removal/placement of pets and other promises). Compliance was within the applicant's control and he did not adduce expected corroboration; therefore enforcement and compensation were not granted.
8 Jan 2019

簡對楊

Citation

[2019] HKFC 6
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC4289/2018

On the evidence the mother was the primary and attachment carer, had stable local support and had chosen nearby kindergartens; because parents were in entrenched conflict and timely school registration was required, the court awarded interim custody to the mother and authorised her to register the children at her chosen kindergarten while maintaining the father's substantial overnight visitation to protect the childrens best interests.