H, RS v. X, Y

FCMC 6583/2024

[2026] HKFC 69

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MATRIMONIAL CAUSES

NO. 6583 OF 2024

(Formerly No. 6733 OF 2023)

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

BETWEEN

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

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

J U D G M E N T
( amendment of summons and disclosure under rule 121 MCR )

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

Amendment Summons

1.  By the summons dated 8 October 2025 issued by the Respondent (“Wife”) (“Setting Aside Summons”), she seeks to set aside the interim injunction granted by DDJ GT Lung on 19 June 2023.

2.  On 6 February 2026, I ordered to dismiss the Setting Aside Summons with costs.

3.  On 12 February 2026, ie 6 days after the dismissal order, the Wife issued a summons to amend the Setting Aside Summons (“Amendment Summons”), returnable on 11 March 2026 before me.

4.  On 25 February 2026, the Wife issued another summons for leave to appeal against the dismissal order. On the same day of this judgment, I hand down a decision to dismiss her summons for leave to appeal with costs.

5.  Since the Setting Aside Summons had been dismissed by me on 6 February 2026 and subsequently the Wife applied for leave to appeal against my decision, the Amendment Summons is logically inconsistent with her application for leave to appeal. In other words, the Setting Aside Summons had been disposed of and there is nothing for the Wife to amend. I fail to see any reason to allow her to amend the Setting Aside Summons.

6.  The Amendment Summons is fatally flawed and must be dismissed. The Wife must also pay costs to the Husband with certificate for Counsel.

Disclosure Summons

7.  It is the second time that the Wife took out the application for disclosure of documents under rule 121 of the Matrimonial Causes Rules. She had issued a similar application on 27 February 2025. Pursuant to my judgment handed down on 2 July 2025[1], her application was dismissed with costs.

8.  Now, the Wife issued another disclosure summons on 12 February 2026 (“Disclosure Summons”), also returnable on 11 March 2026 before me. I would simply adopt and bear in mind the relevant legal principles as set out in paras. 5 to 8 of my judgment handed down on 2 July 2025.

9.  The Wife filed her 35^th affirmation in support of the Disclosure Summons. The background and contents as set out in this affirmation is more or less the same as that set out her 22^nd affirmation which is her supporting affirmation of her first disclosure application filed on 27 February 2025.

10.  After hearing the parties’ submissions regarding the Disclosure Summons on 11 March 2026, I reserved the judgment.

11.  Subsequently, the Wife took out the summons on 9 March 2026 to amend the Disclosure Summons, which is fixed to be heard before me on 16 April 2026 (“Amended Disclosure Summons”).

12.  In my view, the Disclosure Summons and the Amended Disclosure Summons are simply the Wife’s second bite of the cherry. Allowing the disclosure sought by the Wife would be effectively endorsing her potential abuse of process of the court. In view of the procedural history in the present case, the Disclosure Summons including the Amended Disclosure Summons are only two of her many satellite applications. Indeed, most of her applications are meritless, such as her application to transfer to the Court of First Instance, which had been dismissed by DDJ Jeffrey Li on 4 March 2026[2].

13.  Balancing all the circumstances, including the strong public policy of confidentiality in matrimonial proceedings, the interests and potential prejudice to the parties, the Court’s discretion should be exercised against the Wife and the sought disclosure ought to be declined. I order the Disclosure Summons and the Amended Disclosure Summons be dismissed.

Costs

14.  As the Wife fails in these 3 applications, she shall pay costs of them to the Husband with certificate for Counsel. The Husband’s Statement of Costs was submitted claiming $17,708. On board brush approach, I summarily assess at $17,000 payable forthwith by the Wife.