LITT
Try LITT free
WRP v WRQ [2024] SGHCF 12
The court held that a consent order in matrimonial proceedings should only be varied in rare and extreme circumstances where it is unworkable, and that the sanctity of the parties' bargain must be respected.
WOZ v WOY [2024] SGHCF 11
In WOZ v WOY, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Family Law — Custody; Family Law — Matrimonial assets.
WUA v WUB [2024] SGHCF 10
The court determined the division of matrimonial assets based on a 70:30 ratio in favour of the wife, considering both direct and indirect contributions over a 21-year marriage.
Tan Zhi Wei Alan v Tan Jia Lin Jaylin [2023] SGHC 271
An application to remove a joint administrator must be commenced in the Family Courts in the first instance, as it falls within the jurisdiction of the Family Justice Courts.
WLE v WLF [2023] SGHCF 14
The court held that in the division of matrimonial assets, a broad-brush approach is appropriate for attaining a just and equitable division, and that there is no starting point that parents bear the financial burden of child maintenance equally.
Teo Siew Ngoh v Ng Hock Huat [2013] SGHC 82
The court applied a broad brush approach to divide matrimonial assets, awarding the wife 35% of the matrimonial home and 35% of the husband's surplus assets, while awarding a lump sum maintenance of $180,000 in lieu of periodic maintenance.
Wong Kok Yee v Ng Ming San [2008] SGHC 8
In Wong Kok Yee v Ng Ming San, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Family Law.
Toh Buan Eileen v Ho Kiang Fah [2008] SGHC 32
The court declined to exercise its discretion under s 50(2) of the Women's Charter to direct a child to attend counselling, noting that such a direction would not be in the interests of the parties given the child's age and lack of willingness to reconcile.
QZ v QY [2007] SGHC 79
Where there is a conflict of evidence in relation to crucial issues such as the amount of assets owned by one party or his income, the court ought to have resolved the matter by way of a trial.
TT v TU [2007] SGHC 78
The court drew an adverse inference against the Husband for his lack of candour and dishonesty in disclosing assets, and awarded the Wife 40% of the Husband's known assets to achieve a clean break.
Lee Nyuk Lian v Lim Nia Yong [2007] SGHC 44
In Lee Nyuk Lian v Lim Nia Yong [2007] SGHC 44, the Court rejected a narrow view of matrimonial assets, ordering a 60/40 split. It emphasized that non-monetary contributions, such as caregiving and business support, are vital in determining an equitable division of assets in a marriage.
Lee Kok Yong v Lee Guek Hua (alias Li Yuehua) [2007] SGHC 26
An order for the division of matrimonial property is generally a one-off order and not of a continuing nature, and therefore cannot be varied under s 112(4) of the Women's Charter unless it is a continuing order as specified in s 112(5).
Liew Chui Fong (mw) v Yew Kok Chin [2007] SGHC 225
The court applied a broad-brush approach to divide matrimonial assets 60/40 in favour of the husband, considering both financial and non-financial contributions under s 112 of the Women's Charter, and ordered maintenance of $700 per month given the husband's ill health.
VH v VI and Another [2007] SGHC 221
A stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens will not be granted where the defendant has submitted to the jurisdiction and failed to establish that the foreign forum is clearly more appropriate.
Yip Mei Ling Agnes v Tan Thiam Chye [2007] SGHC 214
The court held that a material change in circumstances justifying a variation of maintenance orders must be substantial and not merely based on pre-existing conditions or voluntary financial decisions.
VB v VC [2007] SGHC 186
The decision in [2007] SGHC 186 represents a significant judicial exercise of the "broad brush" approach in the division of matrimonial assets and the determination of maintenance within the context of an acrimonious divorce. The proceedings involved VB (the Petitioner/Wife) and
ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152
Income generated during the marriage from assets that are not matrimonial assets constitutes a matrimonial asset under s 112(10)(b) of the Women's Charter.
Au Kin Chung v Ho Kit Joo [2007] SGHC 150
The court affirmed the division of matrimonial assets, noting that adverse inferences can be drawn against a party for non-disclosure, and that the court has discretion to award a higher proportion of assets to the other party as a result.
UE v UF [2007] SGHC 134
The court determined the division of matrimonial assets based on an equal partnership model, attributing equal credit to both parties for the success of their family business.
TC v TD [2007] SGHC 130
The court held that there was no material change in circumstances to justify a downward variation of maintenance where the applicant's lifestyle and financial receipts (bonuses and reimbursements) indicated he was not as adversely affected by a salary decrease as claimed.
Yap Hwee May Kathryn v Geh Thien Ee Martin and Another [2007] SGHC 108
In Yap Hwee May Kathryn v Geh Thien Ee Martin [2007] SGHC 108, the Court declined to rule on beneficial interests in a joint account, holding that the request did not align with the operative date for the division of matrimonial assets, which is established as the date of the decree nisi.
TQ v TR [2007] SGHC 106
The court held that the best interests of the children are the primary criterion for custody, care and control, and that a prenuptial agreement regarding the division of matrimonial assets can be enforced under s 112 of the Women's Charter.
Tjia Alicia (m.w.) v Aspin Suryanna [2007] SGHC 104
The court determined the division of matrimonial assets and maintenance in a divorce case, finding that the husband remained the owner of his business despite his claims of asset transfer.
Sim Geok Seng (alias Sim Eng Seng Robert) v Lee Kim Kiat [2007] SGHC 100
The court held that in a long marriage, the court should lean towards equal division of matrimonial assets unless the circumstances show that such a division would be inequitable.