LN, by his next friend A, LM v. LK, The Executor to the Estate of LC, Deceased

FCMP 234 /2022

[2025] HKFC 117

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS

NUMBER 234 OF 2022

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

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

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

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

JUDGMENT

(Claim by a dependant for financial provision under Cap 481)

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

Introduction

1.  The relevant background is set out in the judgment of His Honour Judge CK Chan dated 28 March 2024, [2024] HKFC 59 at §§5 to 11 and may be summarised as follows.

2.  Mr. LC (“Deceased”) passed away on 3 March 2022, at the age of 75, with a will. The Deceased was a fish breeder. He was married to Madam Chen. They had 2 children, both are in their mid-40s. The Respondent (“LK”) is his elder son, and subsequently the sole executor and beneficiary of his will.

3.  The Applicant (“LN”) now aged 15, was an illegitimate child of the Deceased. His mother, now acting as his next friend (“Mother”).

4.  The Mother came to Hong Kong as a domestic helper in about 2001. She met the Deceased in around 2002 through text messages. LN was born in 2010.

5.  It was not disputed that ever since the birth of LN and until the death of the Deceased, LN was maintained and under the primary care of the Deceased. The Mother continued to work as a domestic helper elsewhere.

6.  After the Deceased passed away, LN was arranged by the Social Welfare Department (“SWD”) to stay in a children’s hostel (“Hostel”). LN enrolled in a secondary school near to the Hostel.

7.  On 18 May 2023, LK gave an undertaking to pay in his personal capacity to advance on behalf of the estate of the Deceased (“Estate”) a sum of HK$2,495 per month as interim interim maintenance of LN. LK also gave an undertaking on behalf of the Estate to pay 50% of the reasonable costs of LN’s immediate psychological treatment costs.

8.  On 28 March 2024, His Honour Judge CK Chan ordered that LK shall pay a monthly sum of HK$7,200 as the interim maintenance for LN, starting from 1 June 2023 until conclusion of the proceedings or further order of the court.

9.  By a joint table dated 15 April 2025 (“Joint Table”), parties have agreed that the value of the Estate was HK$7,463,760.14 before expenses. After deduction of the expenses, the net value of the Estate was HK$6,006,345.36.

10.  Taking into account LN’s future needs, the Mother makes an open proposal of HK$6,045,212 to be paid out of the Estate as LN’s maintenance. This lump sum would represent the fees for LN to leave the Hostel and rent a 2-bedroom flat, employ a domestic helper to look after him and attend an international school in Hong Kong from September 2026 and would go to the UK for his medical undergraduate studies.

11.  Alternatively, the Mother proposes a sum of HK$6,396,260. This lump sum would represent the fees for LN to go to UK for boarding school from September 2026 onwards, and would stay in the UK for his medical undergraduate studies.

12.  LN’s counsel, Mr Barnes submitted at the closing of trial, that after hearing the evidence of the social welfare officer and the clinical psychologist, the Mother accepted that the proposed option for a flat to be rented, and a domestic helper employed to supervise LN, is unlikely to be appropriate.

13.  LK agrees that the Estate should pay for the reasonable expenses of LN, and he proposes a monthly periodical payment in the sum of HK$9,000 be paid to the Mother for the benefit of LN until he reaches the age of majority, from then on which the periodical payment be paid to LN directly until he finishes full-time education or a lump sum of HK$648,000 being HK$9,000 x 12 months x 6 years, i.e. when LN reaches the age of 21.

The size of the Deceased’s estate

14.  According to the 4th affirmation of LK filed on 4 October 2024, LK explained that the bulk of the Estate was tied up in two landed properties, i.e. the residence of himself and Madam Chen, together with a car parking space and an industrial premises. These properties were held in the name of the Deceased and Madam Chen as tenants in common.

15.  LK and Madam Chen have been residing in the residence for over a decade, while the industrial premises is in a state of disrepair which is neither fit for sale nor for lease.

16.  LK explained that in order to settle all ongoing expenses of the Estate, he had to liquidate all stocks and cash in bank accounts. However, the liquidated funds were insufficient, and he needed to withdraw from his own savings in the amount of HK$432,203.23 to cover the shortfall expenses, including legal costs.

17.  LK further said at the trial that the values of the properties have further decreased. According to his knowledge, the total value of the landed properties should be reduced by at least HK$1.1 million.

18.  Since the parties have filed a Joint Table, I will take the values of the landed properties stated thereon for the purpose of this trial.

Applicable law & legal principles

19.  Under section 3(1)(b)(v) of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance (Cap. 481) (the “Ordinance”), an infant child of the deceased may apply for reasonable financial provision out of the estate of the deceased if he/she is a person, who immediately before the death of the deceased was being maintained, either wholly or substantially, by the deceased.

20.  Section 4 of the Ordinance set out a list of orders which the court may make, such as periodical payments, lump sum or property transfer orders.

21.  Section 5 (1) of the Ordinance sets out 7 matters to which the court is to have regard in exercising the power in section 4. The 7 factors apply to all groups of persons listed in section 3(1) of the Ordinance:

“(a) the financial resources and financial needs which the applicant has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

(b) the financial resources and financial needs which any other applicant for an order under section 4 has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

(c) the financial resources and financial needs which any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

(d) any obligations and responsibilities which the deceased had towards any applicant for any order under section 4 or towards any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;

(e) the size and nature of the net estate of the deceased;

(f) any physical or mental disability of any applicant for an order under section 4 or any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;

(g) any other matter, including the conduct of the applicant or any other person, which in the circumstances of the case the court may consider relevant.”

22.  Section 3(2) of the Ordinance clearly states that the level of financial provision to be granted by the court is limited to what is reasonable in all circumstances for the applicant to receive maintenance.

23.  The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in Ilott v The Blue Cross and others [2017] UKSC 17, [2018] AC 545 provides guidance in determining an award for financial provision under English law, i.e. the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the "Act"). The Ordinance has similar provisions as the Act.

24.  The UK Supreme Court recognizes the concept of "maintenance" imports a provision to meet the everyday expenses of living; it is not limited to subsistence level but it also "cannot extend to any or everything which it would be desirable for the claimant to have". See: Ilott v The Blue Cross and others, §14 and Re Coventry (Deceased) [1980] 1 Ch 461 at 485C-D and 494C-F.

25.  It also confirm reasonable financial provision is to be determined on an objective basis; i.e. what is reasonable for the claimant to receive, and not whether the deceased had acted reasonably. See: Ilott v The Blue Cross and others, §16.

Issue

26.  There is no dispute that no financial provision has been made for LN under the Will.

27.  The issue before the court is simple: what is the reasonable financial provision for LN.

The veracity or credibility of witnesses

28.  The general principles applicable to the assessment of credibility of witness are trite and have been summarized by Mr Justice Au-Yeung in Green Light Multiplex Co. Ltd (formerly known as Green Light Marketing Co. Ltd and GLM International Ltd) v. Lam Shi Yan [2024] HKCFI 2101 at §§48-49.

29.  There were four witnesses, namely, the social welfare office Ms Lo (“Ms Lo”), the clinical psychologist Ms Lam (“Ms Lam”), the Mother and LK.

30.  I find Ms Lo and Ms Lam to be reliable witnesses who had maintained neutrality and impartiality in exercising their judgment. They readily admitted that they were not in a position to comment on whether it would be in LN’s best interests if he were to attend boarding school in the UK or switch to an international school and be taken care of by a domestic helper in Hong Kong. They emphasized that the plans have not been implemented or put into practice, it was not possible for them to give any comment on the proposed plans.

31.  I also find LK to be a reliable witness who did not seek to embellish his testimony or deliberately slant his evidence against the Mother.

32.  On the other hand, I find the Mother to be an unreliable and untruthful witness, who had crafted her testimony largely with the benefit of hindsight. The following examples illustrate the incredible aspects of her testimony:

(1)  The Mother, in her 9th affidavit filed on 11 December 2023, 11th affidavit filed on 4 October 2024 and the Joint Table, claimed that LN was required to pay for his accommodation. However, upon my inquiry with Ms Lo in respect of the monthly accommodation charges paid by LN, it was for first time made known to the court that LN was not required to pay any amount for the accommodation and meals at the Hostel. In short, it was and is free;

(2)  Approaching the end of the trial, I directed both parties to confirm with the Hostel staff whether LN is required to pay any sum to the Hostel as accommodation charges. Both parties reported to the court that it was confirmed that LN is not required to pay any sum for his accommodation. Moreover, LN was and is still receiving HK$1,500 per month as his pocket money;

(3)  Mr Barnes tried to explain that the Mother had provided proof that funds had to be paid to the Hostel through the Director of Social Welfare’s account since her 5^th affidavit filed on 28 September 2023. It was accepted that the Mother did file a letter from the SWD, but she did not in anywhere of her affidavit mentioned that LN was not required to pay a single dollar for his accommodation and meals at the Hostel. In my view, the way how the Mother presented her case appeared to be a devious attempt to mislead the court; and

(4)  The Mother claimed that the Deceased told him that there was a 2019 or 2020 will. Under cross examination, when it was pointed out that there was only a will in 2013, the Mother swiftly changed her evidence altogether from initially saying that the Deceased had a fight with Madam Chen in 2019, to there were many fights and finally to the version of the Deceased had a fight with Madam Chen in 2013. Later Mr Barnes tried to clarify the evidence with the Mother. The Mother then said it was in 2019 when the Deceased told her that there was a will.

The Deceased’s wishes §47 of Ilott v The Blue Cross and others

33.  It is useful to recite the following passage from Lord Hughes JSC in Ilott v The Blue Cross and others:

47. It was not correct to say of the wishes of the deceased that because Parliament has provided for claims by those qualified under section 1 it follows that that by itself strikes the balance between testamentary wishes and such claims … It is not the case that once there is a qualified claimant and a demonstrated need for maintenance, the testator's wishes cease to be of any weight. They may of course be overridden, but they are part of the circumstances of the case and fall to be assessed in the round together with all other relevant factors …

34.  The Deceased’s last will was drawn up on 31 January 2013, i.e., 3 years after the birth of LN. Despite the Mother alleged that the Deceased told her that he would like to give everything to LN, but the Deceased did not draw up a new will to that effect.

35.  As explained above, I disbelieved the Mother’s claim that the Deceased intended to draw up a Will which would give everything to LN. If the Deceased did intend to give anything to LN, he could have done so when he was the primary carer of LN. The Deceased could have opened a child savings account with LN and deposit money to that account on a routine basis. The Deceased however did not make any such arrangement.

36.  LK said prior to the Deceased’s death, on 25 February 2022 at 11:47 pm, the Deceased suddenly sent a message to the family’s Whatsapp group, which consisted of Madam Chen, LK and his sister, and said:

“No, LN, then put him to the welfare department”

37.  I accept LK’s submissions that the Deceased had no intention to leave any part of the Estate to LN.

The Mother’s proposed plans

38.  LN complained to the Mother that the Hostel had strict timetable and curfew in which he had to go to bed by 9:30 pm. The Mother contended that remaining in the Hostel was not conducive to LN’s study.

39.  The Mother also said LN complained that the Hostel was noisy and he does not have enough private space, and hence he could not focus on his studies. LN also told the Mother that he was not able to build any meaningful friendships with people in the Hostel.

40.  Ms Lam, met with LN on a monthly basis for psychology sessions. She had over 20 psychology sessions with LN by now. Ms Lam said LN’s situation was not as negative as described by the Mother. Ms Lam said LN only mentioned the Hostel was being noisy a few times during their 20 odd psychology sessions.

41.  Ms Lam said it was true that at the beginning LN found that it was difficult to build relationships with others, but later he found that the Hostel’s social worker, Ms Lin cared about him and described that the relationship with other boarders were not hostile.

42.  Ms Lam was asked whether she agreed that strict time curfew would affect the academic performance of LN. As aptly put by Ms Lam, it all comes down to LN’s own time management and level of motivation.

43.  I see no force in the Mother’s suggestion that LN should leave the Hostel on the ground of strict timetable, curfew and need for private space, when she proposed LN should attend boarding school.

44.  Both hostel and boarding school have strict timetable. The benefits of boarding included to enable young children to better manage their time through a strict timetable, as well as learning to cope with different people.

45.  I agree with counsel for LK, Ms Leung’s submissions that if LN needs more private space for study, he could go to the library to study. As a matter of fact, there are students’ study room at public libraries.

46.  Both Ms Lo and Ms Lam considered that it would be in LN’s best interests to have structured and regulated life-style. At the Hostel, not only there is a strict timetable, there is also a social worker who followed LN’s case and the Hostel would arrange activities for LN as well. If there was any problem, the social worker would be able to provide assistance. Further, they pointed out that LN’s academic results have improved.

47.  Ms Lo, Ms Lam and the Mother agreed that having emotional support is important to LN.Ms Lam said LN had signs of depression, yet she considered LN’s situation was mild.

48.  When Ms Leung queried the Mother that no one could guarantee whether LN could adjust to the proposed boarding school arrangement and receive the same level of emotional support as he received now, the Mother glibly answered that she could guarantee. It was plain to me, however, that there was no basis for her feeble “optimism”.

49.  Despite it was the Mother’s case that it would be beneficial for LN to attend a boarding school in the UK, LN appeared to have some reservations of this plan. Ms Lam said LN had a few good friends now, he did mention to her that if he was to attend boarding school in UK, he was not certain whether he could meet good friends as he did now.

50.  LN was born and raised in Hong Kong. If LN was to attend a boarding school in the UK, he would need to face a number of uncertainties on his own.

51.  First, he would not be able to meet with the Mother on a regular basis. The Mother said she planned to continue to work in Hong Kong. Second, LN would need to familiarize himself with UK on his own. Third, it is uncertain whether the boarding school in the UK would be able to provide the same level of emotional support to LN as SWD and the Hostel provided to him.

52.  I also do not consider it is in LN’s best interests to change to an international school to further his studies. As explained by Ms Lam, LN has reservations of whether he could meet good friends in a new environment. It had took LN some time to gradually adjusted to the current living and studying environment, by switching to an international school would mean LN need to adjust to a new curriculum, learning environment and build up new relationships.

53.  Having considering the evidence and observations of Ms Lo and Ms Lam, I do not find the Mother’s proposals are in the best interest of LN.

54.  While it is truly unfortunate that LN could not reside with the Mother due to the fact that she is holding a foreign domestic helper visa, it does not follow that the Estate is responsible for luxuries the Mother wants for LN.

What is the reasonable financial provision for LN?

55.  By applying the legal framework I have outlined, maintenance imports a provision to meet the everyday expenses of living; it “cannot extend to any or everything which it would be desirable for the claimant to have".

56.  To reiterate, the purpose of the Ordinance is limited to such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for the applicant to receive for his maintenance; the Ordinance is not for the purpose of obtaining legacies out of the deceased’s estate.

57.  Under section 3 of the Ordinance, the court is required to have regard to the manner in which LN was being or in which he might expect to be educated or trained.

58.  When considering reasonable financial provision and maintenance for LN, I bear in mind the standard of living enjoyed by LN whilst the Deceased was alive.

59.  I find the Mother’s claims were far in excess of what constituted reasonable maintenance under the Ordinance.

60.  From the evidence before me, I find that the Deceased adopted a frugal lifestyle. There is no evidence to suggest that the Deceased was a generous husband or father.

61.  The Deceased and LN lived in a farm house in Hung Shui Kiu. The farm house had been repossessed by the landlord after the Deceased passed away.

62.  According to the Whatsapp messages attached to the Mother’s 1^st affidavit, it was noted that shortly before the death of the Deceased, he was concerned about the secondary school interviews of LN. The school mentioned by the Deceased in his messages were all government aided schools. See exhibit “ALM1-8”, the Deceased’s messages on 22 February 2022 at 05:13 and 24 February 2022 at 05:12.

63.  At the time of the death of the Deceased, LN attended a government funded school. While the Deceased was hospitalized, he sent messages to the Mother to remind LN to attend interviews with government aided secondary schools. LN got allocated to a government subsidized secondary school in Hung Shui Kiu. I find that there was an expectation that LN would continue to receive education at a government aided school.

64.  As Ms Lo rightly pointed out LN is in Form 3, he has not even started to choose the subjects for the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (“HKDSE”), it is premature to pre-empt that LN will attend medical school in the future.

65.  In my view, there is still a significant period of time before LN would have completed his higher or further education. It is not possible for any great detail of what life will look like through the later teens and precisely what needs there will be.

66.  Given the background of how LN was being raised and trained, I do not consider it is reasonable to expect the Estate to fund LN to study in an international school in Hong Kong or a boarding school in the United Kingdom.

67.  LN’s priority need is to complete his secondary education. This is the target of which the award should be aimed at.

68.  Ms Lo confirmed that LN is eligible to continue to reside in the Hostel up to the age of 18. Thereafter, LN can either apply for public housing or in the event he is not able to take care of himself, there is still other hostel available for people over the age of 18.

69.  I consider LN to continue to reside in the Hostel is the only feasible and sensible option in all the circumstances of the case. I will elaborate as follows:

1.  This is a relatively modest Estate and it was most unfortunate that substantial portion of the Estate was spent on defending this application. LK was ordered to pay HK$300,000 as the costs of LN’s interlocutory appeal against Master’s Decision on 21 May 2024. See: [2024] HKFC 105

2.  As stated above, LN will be look after by social worker at the Hostel and in case of emergency, the Hostel will be in a position to notify the Mother and facilitate to provide necessary assistance; and

3.  LN has showed improvement in adjustment and got steady development in the Hostel living and the school.

70.  In the circumstances, LN is to continue to reside in the Hostel and a breakdown of his monthly expenses is as follows:

Monthly Expenses	LN’s claims (HK$)	The Estate’s proposal (HK$)	Court’s assessment (HK$)
Accommodation expenses at the Hostel	Nil
School fees	Nil
Extra tuition (Chinese, and English)	1,860	Not disputed	1,860
Textbooks, learning materials, stationery	125	125	125
Transport to school	Nil
Medical/Dental	125	125	125
Eye check-up and glasses for LN	150	100	150
Extra-curricular activities -Swimming -Badminton	2,792	50, a full swimming course fees has been paid by the Estate and there is no reason why LN needs to take further swimming class. It is unclear why LN needs to have private badminton training when there was no evidence that he is part of the school badminton team.	2,500, I consider that as a teenager LN should attend some extra-curricular activities to enhance his well-being and gain valuable skills. A reasonable allowance should be provided for.
Entertainment/presents	500	300	500
Meals out of home	1,000	800	1,000
Holiday	200	Nil	200
Clothing/shoes (including sporting goods)	200	Not disputed	200
Uniform	250	166.67	200
Mobile phone data plan	168	138	138
Lunches at school and pocket money	1,200		Nil, as SWD is paying 1,500 for LN as pocket money
Others			200, as the possible fee for LN to participate in school outings or holiday camps
Total	8,570		7,198

71.  The assessment calls for a broad brush approach. I consider a sum of HK$7,198 would represent reasonable financial provision for LN. This sum of money is reasonably required to ensure he is maintained, given the limited means of the Mother, the Estate and previous standard of living enjoyed by LN.

72.  The Mother agrees to contribute HK$1,000 as LN’s monthly expenses, hence the amount which is required to be paid by the Estate would be HK$6,198.

73.  I am mindful that when LN reaches the age of 18, he would need to leave the Hostel and in the event he continues with his undergraduate studies, the above sum would not be sufficient, hence I would further add to items as follows:

Monthly Expenses	The court’s assessment (HK$)
Accommodation expenses for public housing or other youth hostel	2,000 per month, according to Ms Lo, LN could apply for public housing in due course and the current monthly rental is less than 2,000 per month
School fees	The current annual tuition fee for Hong Kong’s public universities is HK$42,100

74.  As explained above, there is still a significant period of time before LN completes his secondary education. If LN decides to continue his studies after his HKDSE, doing the best I can, assuming that he would enroll into a full-time undergraduate program with one of Hong Kong’s public universities, the Estate should pay him a lump sum of HK$264,400 (2,000 x 12 months x 4 + 42,100 x 4).

75.  In addition to his daily expenses, LN also claims a sum of HK$560,000 for orthodontic treatment. The Mother produced 2 photographs of LN’s dental mould as evidence. The Mother’s basis for such claim is this: “as LN’s facial feature develops, it has come to my attention that his teeth are quite misaligned. I have arranged for LN to see an orthodontist in August 2024 for an initial consultation”.

76.  According to the Mother’s understanding, LN is not ready to undergo the orthodontic treatment now as his jaw development on both sides of his skull is unbalanced. The Mother was told to budget HK$500,000 for oral surgery on both jaws and around HK$60,000 for orthodontic treatment.

77.  Ms Leung submitted that the Mother has failed to discharge her burden of proof. The Mother could not give any explanation as to why there was no written medical evidence and fee quotation to prove her case.

78.  Under cross examination, the Mother gave different versions of explanation as to why LN was required to have orthodontic treatment. The Mother said LN has “excess teeth” and then “moving teeth” and “loose teeth”. Ms Leung submitted that all these signs would suggest LN needs tooth removal rather than orthodontic treatment.

79.  It is apparent that there is no medical evidence to suggest that LN’s teeth had any significant problem. In my view, HK$560,000 is a substantial amount for orthodontic treatment. In the absence of any medical report and fee quotation, I do not find it reasonable to require the Estate to be responsible for this sum simply based on the Mother’s mere say so. I would not allow orthodontic treatment as part of LN’s reasonable financial provision.

80.  I need to make it clear that the sum of HK$264,400 should only be paid to LN upon he produces evidence to the Estate to prove that he gets admitted and has enrolled to a full-time post-secondary education or university.

81.  I initially consider the source of LN’s needs should come from the sale proceeds of the Deceased’s share in the industrial property for the following reasons:

(1)  The industrial property is a vacant property, producing no net income, and it is no one’s home;

(2)  It would leave LK the benefit of the residential property which is his home, out of the Estate;

(3)  The Deceased’s wishes are to leave everything to LK, by giving LK to remain in the residential property without any interruption would give effect to the Deceased’s testamentary wishes; and

(4)  As mentioned earlier, the Estate incurred substantial legal costs as a result of defending the applications raised by the Mother and there was no available cash.

82.  LK informed the court that he would not sell the industrial property because Madam Chen is also a co-owner of the industrial property. LK said Madam Chen who is already aged 75 has no knowledge of the present litigation and she simply could not take it. LK is prepared to take out personal loan to settle the award to be ordered by the court.

83.  Taking into account that LN is now a Form 3 student, it will take him 3 more years from now to complete his secondary school studies and finish his HKDSE. I accept LK’s submissions that there is a need for LN’s interests to be safeguarded from possible overspending, misuse or dissipation and also to ensure that the periodical payment would be received by LN in a timely manner.

84.  In the circumstances, I consider that a lump sum equivalent to the capitalized maintenance amount be paid into Court for the Court to make periodical payments out to the Mother for the benefit of LN.

85.  In the circumstances, a sum of HK$223,128, being HK$6,198 per month x 12 months x 3 years should be paid into court for the benefit of LN up to the stage of completion of his secondary school studies.

86.  If LN continues with full time studies after completion of his secondary school and reaches the age of 18 whichever is later, then a sum of HK$561,904 being HK$6,198 x 12 months x 4 + HK$264,400 should be directly paid to LN.

Costs

87.  There are two aspects of costs in these proceedings. The costs of LN and LK’s costs.

88.  LN submitted that LK should bear the costs of these proceedings in his personal capacity, because LK had overstepped his duty and has embroiled himself as if personal hostile litigation.

89.  It is LK’s case that reasonable maintenance should be made for LN. LK’s open offer was HK$9,000 per month, while the court assessed amount is HK$6,198 before he finishes his secondary school studies. I do not find LK has acted unreasonably in defending this claim, in particular when I find that the Mother is not a credible and reliable witness.

90.  I find that LK should be entitled to his costs, including all costs reserved, be paid out of the Deceased’s estate, to be taxed on a solicitor and client basis, if not agreed.

91.  I invite parties to make written submissions on LN’s costs within 14 days from the date of this judgment.

Conclusion

92.  Due to the matters set out above, I will make the following order:

1.  A lump sum of HK$223,128 be paid out of the Estate of the Deceased into Court for LN within 28 days from the date hereof;

2.  The lump sums as set out in paragraph (1) above be kept in an interest-bearing account and invested by the Court with a monthly periodical payment in the sum of HK$6,198 for LN be paid out to LN through his next friend for his maintenance on the first day of each month until LN reaches the age of 18 and by then the balance of the lump sum together with interests, if any, be paid out to him in its entirety. The first payment be payable to LN’s next friend on the first working day of September 2025;

3.  A lump sum of HK$561,904 be paid out of the Estate to LN within 28 days from the date when LN continues with full time studies after his completion of secondary school and reaches the age of 18 whichever is later, and having proved that he has been admitted and enrolled into full time studies;

4.  The interim maintenance order of His Honour Judge CK Chan dated 28 March 2024 be discharged;

5.  LK should be entitled to his costs, including all costs reserved, with certificate of counsel, be paid out of the Deceased’s estate, to be taxed on a solicitor and client basis, if not agreed; and

6.  Both parties do lodge their written submissions on LN’s costs within 14 days from the date of this judgment.