Read the full judgment text of CACV 000216/2007 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 13 January 2009 before Hon Rogers VP, Sakhrani and Wright JJ.
Divorce – Ancillary Relief – Asset Distribution – Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance Cap.192 s.7 – Fairness – Contribution – White v White [2002] 2 FLR 981 – Appeal allowed – 50% share awarded – Costs ordered – The parties were married in 1969 and had three children. The husband retired from the police force in 1978 and the couple established various businesses including a finance company and estate agency. In 1994 the family emigrated to Canada but the husband remained in Hong Kong while the wife and children obtained Canadian citizenship. The parties separated in December 2001 and divorce proceedings were initiated in December 2003. The appeal was from a judgment of Deputy District Judge Kot given on 25 September 2006 in ancillary relief proceedings. The judge below assessed the total value of assets at HK$67 million and awarded the wife a 45% share. This court allowed the wife's appeal and ordered that she be entitled to 50% of the family assets. The court considered the principles from White v White [2002] 2 FLR 981 and other authorities which indicate that fairness often dictates that family assets should be shared equally unless there is good reason to depart. The judge below had placed too much emphasis on financial contribution to the detriment of considering the importance of the respective roles in the marriage. Given the length of the marriage and the contributions made by the parties to the welfare of the family, the court concluded that the assets should be shared equally. The court also considered the costs of committal proceedings which had been taken out by the husband but not proceeded with. The court declined to accept jurisdiction in the matter since there had been no resolution in the court below and there was no notice of any appeal from any judgment or order of the court below. The wife was ordered to have 50% of her costs in the court below and the costs of the appeal.
Legal issues: Distribution of family assets · Costs of committal proceedings
Outcome: Appeal allowed; wife entitled to 50% of family assets.
Cites 1 case