Read the full judgment text of CACV 182/2015 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 13 April 2016 before 林文瀚，張澤祐，朱芬齡.
Divorce – Ancillary Relief – Concealment of Assets – Adverse Inference – Hearsay Evidence – Court of Appeal – Appeal dismissed – Costs awarded – Petitioner failed to disclose financial resources regarding Shenzhen properties – Original judge entitled to draw adverse inference on beneficial ownership and value – Hearsay evidence regarding delivery notes admissible as background – Appeal dismissed with costs summary assessed at HK$500
Legal issues: Adverse inference on beneficial ownership · Adverse inference on property value · Admissibility of hearsay evidence
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; costs awarded to Respondent
Cites 2 cases