Read the full judgment text of CACV 9/2004 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 26 May 2006 before Hon. Yeung JA, Hon. Yuen JA, Hon. Sakhrani J.
Matrimonial proceedings – Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance (Cap. 192) s.17 – disposition of assets – intention to defeat financial relief – presumption rebuttal – fresh evidence – Ladd v Marshall – valuation evidence – perjury allegations – appeal dismissed – costs order nisi. The Wife appealed a judge's order setting aside transfers of two elderly homes to relatives under s.17 MPPO. She sought to adduce fresh evidence regarding investments in PRC, criminal charges against Husband, and a partnership agreement. The Court held the judge was correct to refuse fresh evidence as it could have been obtained with reasonable diligence. The judge was not obliged to address disputed evidence on perjury allegations as it was irrelevant to the s.17 issue. The judge was correct to refuse valuation evidence due to delay and prejudice. Appeal dismissed with costs order nisi against the Wife.
Legal issues: Fresh evidence application · Valuation evidence refusal · False evidence and perjury allegations
Outcome: Appeal dismissed.