Read the full judgment text of FCMC 12808/2017 on BabelCite. This Family Court judgment was delivered on 19 October 2022 before His Honour Judge S. Lo.
Matrimonial Causes – Divorce – 2 years’ separation – Jurisdiction – s.15B MCO – Grave financial hardship – Costs – WKL (Petitioner) v GF (Respondent) – Petitioner husband sought divorce based on 2 years’ separation since June 2014 – Respondent wife contested jurisdiction, alleged misrepresentation under s.15(3) MCO, claimed grave financial hardship under s.15B MCO, and denied separation – Court held Hong Kong courts had jurisdiction based on petitioner’s domicile and wife’s submission via Answer – Section 15(3) MCO not applicable as leave not needed after 16 years of marriage – Section 15B MCO hardship defence failed as ancillary relief separate and mediation reached regarding daughter – Separation established via agreement and evidence of separate living arrangements under same roof then separate roofs – Adultery allegations irrelevant to 2-year separation petition – Decree nisi granted for dissolution of marriage – Wife ordered to pay costs of the suit to the Husband with certificate for counsel – Costs follow events due to vigorous contestation – Parties married in Hong Kong on 12 February 2001 with child born 27 October 2005 – Husband petitioned on 29 September 2017 – Wife initially did not contest but filed Answer in September 2019 denying separation – Trial held 4 May 2022 – Judgment 19 October 2022 – Judge S. Lo – Petitioner represented by Ms Joyce H.Y. Lee of Raymond Luk & Co. – Respondent appeared in person – Court found parties lived apart continuously since June 2014 – Agreement for Harmonious Marriage signed by parties supported separation claim – Wife’s credibility doubted due to inconsistent stance – Jurisdiction established by Deputy Judge AN Tse Ching in 2019 – Res judicata applied – US recognition of divorce not relevant – Bigamy case in Mainland irrelevant – Hardship claim dismissed as no grave financial loss proven – Ancillary proceedings available separately – Mediation settlement reached for daughter support – Decree nisi absolute unless varied – Costs order nisi – Section 11A of the MCO allows divorce if one fact satisfied – Court will not investigate adultery details if separation proven – Modern approach to dissolve marriage quickly and painlessly – Wife failed to establish any defence to the Husband’s divorce petition – Court granted decree nisi for dissolution of the marriage – Wife to pay costs of the suit to the Husband with certificate for counsel to be taxed if not agreed – Section 15B MCO requires grave financial hardship and wrong to dissolve marriage – Court considered conduct of parties and interest of children – Wife claimed difficulty in continuing proceedings in Hong Kong due to lack of funds – Court noted Wife commenced action in Court of First Instance for $27 million – Wife’s affirmations not allowed as evidence without leave – Opening submission cannot stand as witness statement – Ladd v Marshall conditions not satisfied for new evidence – Husband’s witness statement and oral evidence accepted – Parties lived separate lives including separate holidays and meals – Physical intimacy lacked – Wife’s allegations of adultery did not assist her case – Court emphasized policy of dissolving marriage quickly and painlessly – No point in enquiry into behaviour merely to satisfy feelings – Decree nisi granted – Costs order made against Wife
Legal issues: Lack of jurisdiction of the Hong Kong Court · Misrepresentation or concealment under section 15(3) of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance cap.179 · Grave financial or other hardship under section 15B MCO · Lack of 2 years’ separation before the presentation of the Petition · Alleged adultery of Husband
Outcome: Decree nisi granted for dissolution of marriage
Cites 5 cases