Read the full judgment text of CACV 216/2011 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 28 January 2013 before Hon Cheung JA, Hon Lam JA, Hon Barma JA.
Variation of periodical payment – Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance (Cap. 192) s.11 – Fairness – Inheritance – Cohabitation – White line of cases – Appeal allowed – Whether the Judge erred in principle in ordering a downward adjustment of periodical payment based on the wife's inheritance and cohabitation without considering the husband's increased wealth and the principle of fairness – Yes; the Judge erred in principle by harking back to the budgetary or reasonable needs approach which has been disavowed by the Courts – Whether the Judge correctly assessed the amount the cohabitant K M ought to contribute towards the wife's household expenses – No; the Judge erred by holding K M ought to contribute £600 per month without first determining K M's financial position – Appeal allowed. Judge's order discharged. Husband required to pay periodical payment according to the 2006 Order as modified. Parties required to lodge written submission within 14 days on costs.
Legal issues: Principle of variation of periodical payment · Assessment of contribution from cohabitant
Outcome: Appeal allowed. Judge's order discharged. Husband required to pay periodical payment according to the 2006 Order as modified.
Cites 1 case