Read the full judgment text of CACV 350/2021 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 8 April 2022 before Hon Barma and Chow JJA.
Divorce – Jurisdiction – Substantial connection – Matrimonial Causes Ordinance s.3(c) – Exceptionality – Appeal dismissed. The Court of Appeal considered whether the Husband had a substantial connection with Hong Kong under s 3(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance, Cap 179. The Husband, a Hong Kong permanent resident residing in Dongguan, argued he lacked sufficient connection as his family was not in Hong Kong. The Court held that physical presence is necessary but must be real and not transitory. The Husband maintained consistent economic and social presence through his business and visits. The Court clarified that 'exceptionality' is not a separate test but describes cases where family context is absent. Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal issues: Substantial connection under s 3(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance · Whether 'exceptionality' is a separate test for jurisdiction
Outcome: Appeal dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 2 cases