Family Law高手入: SMO (Cap 16)

上堂得知Separation and Maintenance Order (Cap 16)裏的任何orders: non-cohabitation, maintenance 和custody將會被撤銷如果夫妻相方再同居超過6個月或任何一方通姦. 這一點法例裏寫得很清楚, 而且問老師時她也確認.

但我有一個極大的疑問 (包括老師的答案也讓我匪疑所思), 如果法庭只頒布"maintenance order", 即是只是說夫妻其中一方沒有妥善給maintenance對方, 他們應該還住在一起, 那為甚麼會有"如果再同居住過6個月, maintenance order就會給discharged"呢? 那是否說如果我老公/老婆只是沒有妥善給maintenance 我, 我要申請SMO maintenance order 後, 要立刻跟我的老公/老婆分居呢? 如果所有SMO orders已presume 夫妻分居, 那為甚麼會有個"non-cohabitation order"多此一舉呢?

老師給我的答案是: 對, SMO是presume 夫妻分開, 然後她再沒有更logical的解釋了.


But why my notes and book mention one order is the "non-cohabitation order"?

Checking the SMO, I think it refers to s5(1)(a): [to be cont]

更新 2:

"that the applicant be no longer bound to cohabit with the other party to the marriage (which provision while in force shall have the effect of a decree of judicial separation on the ground of cruelty);"

更新 3:

Yes, the "separation order", as what you said.

So if the couple is supposed to separate in order to enforce any SMO order. Then why there is one more "separation order"?

1 個解答

  • Gary
    Lv 7
    6 年前

    Your teacher is both correct and wrong.

    1. There is no such thing as "non-cohabitation order" under Cap. 16.

    2. When a SMO is issued, the couple has to be separated. The court will not normally issue a SMO unless at least a person of the couple apply for legal separation.

    So it is logical to say SMO can be discharged automatically after 6 months of cohabitation.

    2015-01-27 04:27:33 補充:

    I don't know why your note says that.

    But this term never shows up in the actual ordiance.

    My explanation is non-cohabitation order is in fact the same as the separation order. As in plain English, both mean "not living together".