SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(HK)(HKFC) 346

FCMC 9831/2022

[2025] HKFC4

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MATRIMONIAL CAUSES NO. 9831 OF 2022

__________________________________

BETWEEN

TKW Petitioner

and

NLPS Respondent

___________________________________

Coram: Deputy District Judge W.Y. Ho in Chambers (Not open to public)
Date of Hearing: 9 – 11 January 2024 and 19 April 2024
Date of Judgment: 17 January 2025

---------------------

JUDGMENT
(Ancillary Relief)

---------------------

Note: For the protection of privacy, the personal information in this decision has been redacted.

1. Both parties apply for ancillary relief against each other.

2. On the day of the trial, the parties’ open proposals were as follows:

1) The Petitioner:

a) There be an equal division of the matrimonial home in Palm Springs, Yuen Long (“the Former Matrimonial Home”)

b) There be equal division of assets between the parties. To achieve equal division, the Respondent should be ordered to pay a lump sum to achieve equalization of the matrimonial assets between the parties.

c) The Respondent pay costs to the Petitioner.

2) The Respondent:

a) The Petitioner shall have 50% of the net value of the Former Matrimonial Home after deducting various loans advanced by the Respondent, renovation costs, outstanding mortgage payments, and the deposit for purchasing the Former Matrimonial Home paid by Respondent. The Petitioner’s share of the net value of the Former Matrimonial Home be paid by the Respondent in instalments.

b) The Respondent shall transfer her shares in the Petitioner’s company (“Fxxxxxx”) to the Petitioner at nil consideration. The Petitioner shall indemnify the Respondent against all Fxxxxxx’s liabilities.

c) Parties retain all other assets in their own name.

3. All monetary figures are in Hong Kong dollars unless otherwise specified.

A. BACKGROUND

4. As at the date of the trial, the Petitioner (“the Husband”) is 62 years old and the Respondent (“the Wife”) is 58 years old. The parties do not have any children.

5. I set out the chronology of the salient facts below:

DATE EVENT
12 October 1990 Parties were married in Hong Kong
16 July 1991 Fxxxxxx was established
16 May 1994 Parties purchased the 1 st Matrimonial Home (“Lido”)
14 May 1996 Parties purchased the 2 nd Matrimonial Home (“Parc Versailles”)
15 July 1996 Parties sold Lido
23 April 2003 Parties purchased the 3 rd Matrimonial Home (“Hong Lok Yuen”)
22 October 2003 Parties sold Hong Lok Yuen
9 October 2003 Wife learns of Husband’s extra marital affair with Ms Shang
22 October 2003 Husband signed a nomination document (“the Nomination”) for the Wife to purchase


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top