W v H

CourtFamily Court (Hong Kong)
Judgment Date19 January 2018
Neutral Citation[2018] HKFC 15
Judgement NumberFCMC6420/2014
Subject MatterMatrimonial Causes
FCMC6420/2014 W v. H

FCMC 6420 / 2014

[2018] HKFC 15




NUMBER 6420 OF 2014


W Petitioner


H Respondent


Coram : Deputy District Judge J. Chow in Chambers (Not Open to Public)

Date of Hearing : 19 December 2017

Date of Judgment : 19 January 2018






1. The petitioner mother (“the mother”) filed a summons on 7 July 2017 for variation of interim maintenance of children of the family against the respondent father (“the father”) for an increase of HK$25,000 from the existing interim maintenance order for the children. In the order dated 14th February 2012, the father was order to pay HK$14,500 as interim maintenance for the children from 1 December 2011. In a subsequent order dated 8 April 2016 (under FCMC No. 12626 of 2011), the said sum was further increased to HK$16,500. In this application, the mother is asking the father to pay HK$41,500 each month.

2. The children of the family, two boys, are now 11 and 9 years of age respectively (“the children”).

3. The mother’s application was premised on the decrease of her own financial resources. She suggested it is viable for the father to further mortgage the matrimonial home for immediate needs of the children. The father opposed, he wished to maintain the current level of maintenance because of limited means. The issue therefore, is whether the children maintenance should be varied upon the mother’s current financial resources vis-à-vis the father’s means.

The legal principles

4. The applicable legal provision for interim maintenance can be found in section 3 of the Matrimonial Proceedings and Properties Ordinance, Cap 192 (“Cap 192”), the governing principle is that the court shall make such order as it considers reasonable in all circumstances.

5. In C v L (unrep, FCMC 13605/2013, 10 December 2014), HHJ Melloy summarized the law on interim maintenance in paragraph 5 of her decision:

“The law is well known and not in dispute. Section 3 MPPO Cap192 states that the only governing principle is that the court shall make such order as it considers reasonable in all of the circumstances of the case. Consequently applications such as these are approached on a broad-brush basis. A detailed examination of the parties’ means may be examined at a later date at a full ancillary relief hearing if there is no agreement in the meantime, when there is then every opportunity to achieve fairness by means of set off. In other words, if there is any overpayment or underpayment that can normally be rectified at a final ancillary relief hearing. Applications for interim maintenance for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT