Read the full judgment text of FCMC 3123/2021 on BabelCite. This Family Court judgment was delivered on 1 August 2024 before His Honour Judge S Lo.
Family law – Matrimonial Causes – Leave to Appeal – Custody – Access – District Court Ordinance s.63A(2) – KNM v. HTF – Petitioner HKW applied for leave to appeal against judgment dated 9 January 2024 granting joint custody and sole care and control to Petitioner with defined access to Respondent YYC for child Cazzie born July 2019 – Petitioner disagreed with defined access order and applied for stay of execution – Application disposed of on paper without oral hearing – Legal principles: Section 63A(2) District Court Ordinance requires reasonable prospect of success or other reasons in interest of justice – Ground 1: Defined access arrangement places excessive caring time and responsibility upon F – Court held access not excessive if F off duty or on leave with assistance from mother or domestic helper – Ground 2: Order for defined access made on fundamentally different structure from SWO recommendations without justification – Court held family judge has unfettered discretion not bound by SWO recommendations – Ground 3: No strict rule on equal sharing of long school holidays – Court held F's access likely less than 50% due to work schedule and staying access conditions – Conclusion: M failed to demonstrate reasonable prospect of success – Leave to appeal dismissed – Stay of execution dismissed – Costs: M to pay F's costs to be taxed if not agreed, F's own costs taxed per Legal Aid Regulations
Legal issues: Leave to Appeal Test · Ground 1 - Excessive Access · Ground 2 - SWO Recommendations · Ground 3 - Holiday Sharing
Outcome: Leave to appeal dismissed; Stay of execution dismissed
Cited by 5 cases