Read the full judgment text of CAMP 106/2020 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 29 March 2021 before Lam Woon-ham (Vice President of the Court of Appeal), Cheung Chak-yau (Justice of Appeal of the Court of Appeal).
Family law – ancillary relief – divorce – property division – leave to appeal – stay of execution – apparent bias – constructive trust – resulting trust – costs – Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance (Cap 192) s.7 – Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A) Order 59 rule 2A(8) – The Respondent husband applied for leave to appeal against an ancillary relief order made by Deputy District Judge PANG Ka-kwong on 14 October 2019, which ordered equal division of family assets of HK$145,587,318 after a 29-year marriage. The husband claimed properties were held on trust for his mother, but the judge rejected this. Grounds of appeal included failure to consider statutory factors, apparent bias, factual errors on age restrictions for bank accounts, failure to accept the mother's evidence, and that the properties belonged to the deceased mother. The Court of Appeal held that the grounds lacked merit: Ground 1 was generic; Ground 2 was unsupported as the judge gave sufficient time; Grounds 3-5 involved factual findings without manifest error. The deceased's evidence was considered and her estate chose not to intervene. The applications for leave and stay were dismissed as totally without merit. The court ordered the husband to pay costs of HK$90,000 and that no oral hearing may be requested.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal against ancillary relief order · Application for stay of execution · Oral hearing application under Order 59 rule 2A(8)
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal and application for stay of execution dismissed.
Cited by 4 cases · Cites 1 case