Read the full judgment text of CACV 224/2013 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 12 March 2015 before Lam VP, Kwan and Chu JJA.
Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance, Cap 192 – ancillary relief – non-matrimonial property – sharing principle – duration of marriage – mixing of assets – appeal standard – discretion – Whether the judge erred in applying the sharing principle to non-matrimonial assets – Whether the duration of the marriage alone justifies departure from equal division – Whether the two-step approach is mandatory over the telescoped approach – Judge did not err in applying the sharing principle to non-matrimonial property – Duration is a relevant factor but not freestanding – Neither approach is mandatory, fairness is the ultimate test – Appeal dismissed – Husband to pay wife's costs of the appeal, with a certificate for two counsel
Legal issues: Application of sharing principle to non-matrimonial assets · Duration of marriage as a factor for departure from equal division · Mandatory nature of the two-step approach for non-matrimonial property
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Cited by 36 cases · Cites 3 cases