Read the full judgment text of HCMP 2506/2009 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 7 June 2012 before Deputy High Court Judge Au-Yeung.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance (Cap 481) – maintenance – adult child – reasonable financial provision – moral obligation – light the lantern agreement – credibility – authorization – claim dismissed – costs order. The applicant, Tang Tim Chue (TTC), claimed monthly maintenance from his father's estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance, Cap 481. The father died in 2005, leaving his estate to Madam Yip's children via will. TTC alleged a light the lantern agreement where the father promised him half the estate and authorized him to manage lands and collect rent. The court found the relationship between father and son was poor, the authorization was not proven, and TTC was not substantially maintained by the father immediately before death. Although the father breached a moral obligation under the agreement, the court could not assess TTC's financial position due to lack of disclosure on earning capacity. Adverse inference was drawn against TTC. The claim was dismissed in its entirety. The applicant was ordered to bear costs on a party and party basis, while the executors' costs were borne out of the estate on a trustee basis.
Legal issues: Whether applicant was wholly or substantially maintained by deceased · Whether will made reasonable financial provision · Whether discretion should be exercised to make provision
Outcome: Claim dismissed.
Cited by 8 cases · Cites 3 cases