Lui Ming Lok v. Ng Im Fong Loretta
Read the full judgment text of CACV 418/2020 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 8 January 2024 before Kwan VP, Cheung and Chow JJA.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal – great general or public importance – Matrimonial Causes Ordinance (Cap. 179) s.20(1)(b) – construction of statute preserving common law rule that marriage is void where one party lacked mental capacity to understand nature of marriage – whether s.20 grounds apply only on petition for nullity between spouses – inapplicability of s.20 to third-party challenges to validity of marriage in civil dispute – estate of deceased – challenge to validity of marriage brought by heir against executrix of estate – whether section 20(1)(b) preserves common law rule on mental capacity – whether section 20 applies outside nullity petition between spouses – leave granted on both questions – costs of application in the cause of the appeal.
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal should be granted on questions of great general or public importance regarding interpretation of section 20(1)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance
Outcome: Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal granted
Cited by 3 cases · Cites 3 cases
|
CACV 418/2020, [2024] HKCA 27 On Appeal From [2022] HKCFI 1243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 418 OF 2020 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAP NO. 28 OF 2019) ________________________
________________________
________________________
__________________ DECISION __________________ Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) : I. Introduction 1.This Court (Cheung, Yuen and Chow JJA) handed down a judgment on 14 July 2023 ([2023] 4 HKLRD 37; [2023] HKCA 865) (the ‘CA Judgment’), dismissing the appeal of the plaintiff and upholding the judgment of Coleman J (the Judge) in [2020] HKCFI 1243 (the ‘CFI Judgment’). 2.By a notice of motion filed on 11 August 2023, (the ‘Notice of Motion’), the plaintiff applies for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal on the great general or public importance limb in respect of the following two questions. The defendant opposes his application. 1) Question 1 3.Whether, in light of the legal and legislative history and on proper construction, section 20(1)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance (Cap. 179) (‘MCO’) preserves the common law rule (the ‘Common Law Rule’) that a marriage is void where one of the parties lacked the mental capacity to understand the nature of marriage at the time of its celebration. 2) Question 2 4.Whether the grounds in section 20 of MCO apply only on a petition for nullity by one spouse against another such that they are inapplicable in a case where the validity of a marriage was challenged under the Common Law Rule in the course of a civil dispute involving a third party. II. Conclusion 5.We are satisfied that the two questions involve questions of great general or public importance and accordingly we will grant leave to the plaintiff. III. Costs 6.Costs of the application be in the cause of the appeal to be taxed if not agreed.
Mr. Anson Wong SC and Mr. Billy N P Ma, instructed by Chiu, Szeto & Cheng, for the plaintiff Mr. Au Lut Chi and Mr. Griffith Cheng, instructed by Francis Kong & Co., for the defendant | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 418/2020