Private Wealth & Family Law Practice Group
Adultery Damages Aligned with a Parallel Related Case
2026-05-08
1. Facts and Background
Client A (the plaintiff) learned, from a third party, of an extramarital
relationship between A's spouse and B (the defendant). Subsequently, B's spouse
commenced a damages action against Client A's spouse. In response, Client A
retained LKP to bring a damages action against B and indicated a wish to obtain
damages at a level comparable to that recognized in the related case.
2. Key Legal Issues
The main issues were: (i) how to incorporate the developing trends of the
related case and the criteria applied to the calculation of damages into the
present matter; (ii) how, in response to the court's recommendation that the
case be transferred to the court of B's domicile, to organize the doctrinal
basis for jurisdiction by appearance — including the principle that, where the
defendant pleads to the merits without objecting to jurisdiction, jurisdiction
by appearance may be recognized — so as to keep the matter before the same
panel; and (iii) how to incorporate the principle of equity with the related
case into the relief sought and the scope of the claim, and how to construct
oral arguments so as to elicit a consistent judicial determination.
3. Implementation and Outcome
LKP (i) analyzed the content, issues, and calculation methodology of the
related case and designed the relief sought, the scope of the claim, and the
damages-calculation strategy accordingly; (ii) adopted a strategy of filing the
complaint with the same court and, in response to the court's recommendation of
transfer of jurisdiction, organized the doctrinal grounds for jurisdiction by
appearance and explained the practical advantages of having the matter heard by
the same panel; and (iii) consistently presented the facts and the claim by
reference to the principle of equity with the related case throughout the oral
proceedings. The court recognized B's liability for the extramarital conduct
and ordered B to pay Client A consolation money together with delayed-payment
interest. The case shows how, where related cases are pending in parallel,
jurisdictional strategy and the principle of equity can be combined into a
coherent litigation strategy.






