LITT
Try LITT free
WKK v WKL
An action that has been discontinued pursuant to an unless order cannot be reinstated by a summons; it must be recommenced as a fresh action or by an appeal to set aside the unless order.
WGW v WGX
Direct financial contributions to a matrimonial asset include monies applied toward the improvement of the asset, not just its acquisition.
WNE v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The principle of parity requires that co-offenders in similar circumstances should receive similar sentences, and a probation order for a young offender should not be harsher than that of a co-offender in identical circumstances.
WLR & Anor v WLT & Anor
The court determined the appointment of deputies for a person lacking mental capacity and set aside a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) executed when the person lacked the requisite mental capacity.
WAH v WAG
Interlocutory orders in family proceedings are temporary and should not be lightly appealed against, as they are discretionary and intended to facilitate a smoother trial.
VUQ v VUP
The court affirmed the division of matrimonial assets, finding that the transfer of the matrimonial home to the wife was equitable and that the husband could realise his share of assets through the sale of his sole-named properties in Malaysia.
VFU v VFV
A Syariah Court continuation certificate is not required for committal proceedings in the Family Court if the original civil proceedings (OSG 9/2017) had already concluded with a final order before the commencement of divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court.
TEN v TEO
The court affirmed joint custody but granted care and control to the father, emphasising that the best interests of the children required a period of no direct contact with the mother to allow for therapeutic recovery, while maintaining the father's obligation to facilitate futur
URF & Anor v URH
The Family Division of the High Court does not have jurisdiction over independent civil claims (Inter Vivos Claims) that do not fall within the definition of 'family proceedings' under the Family Justice Act 2014.
TAU v TAT
The court held that shared care and control is not a legal presumption and must be determined based on the child's welfare, considering factors like parental co-operation and the child's developmental needs.
UDF v UDG
The court refused to grant interim access orders for a father to see his teenage daughter in the US or to bring her to Singapore for summer vacation, prioritising the child's expressed wishes and her need for stability during a transition period in her education.
TOW v TOV
A judge is not required to recuse himself from hearing a subsequent matter simply because he had made adverse findings against a party in an earlier related matter, provided that the judge did not express his views in such outspoken, extreme or unbalanced terms as to cast doubt o
TAU v TAV
The court held that the District Judge's orders regarding the division of matrimonial assets were just and equitable, particularly in ensuring the needs of the children for a home were met, and thus dismissed the appeal.
WAH v WAG and another appeal [2022] SGHCF 9
Interlocutory orders in family proceedings are temporary and should not be lightly appealed against, as they are discretionary and intended to preserve the status quo pending the final hearing.
VLI v VLJ [2022] SGHCF 8
A dispute over a child's citizenship is a matter pertaining to custody, not care and control. Sole custody is only ordered in exceptional circumstances, and acrimony alone is insufficient to justify it.
VUQ v VUP [2022] SGHCF 6
The court dismissed the husband's appeal against the division of matrimonial assets, finding that the transfer of the matrimonial home to the wife was equitable and would not leave the husband homeless.
URN v URM and another appeal [2022] SGHCF 2
The court held that a foreign maintenance order did not supersede a prior Singapore maintenance order where the foreign court did not exercise its matrimonial jurisdiction in making the order.
VBS v VBR [2021] SGHCF 32
The court dismissed the appeal against a variation of child maintenance, noting that the appellant failed to adduce evidence for her own variation application and that the lower court's assessment of cleaning expenses was not erroneous.
CLT v CLS and another matter [2021] SGHCF 29
In a single-income marriage of 17 years with a massive pool of assets, the court applied a broad-brush approach to divide assets 30:70 in favour of the husband, noting that equality is not the starting point and the ANJ approach is inapplicable.
TOE v TOF [2019] SGHCF 19
The court held that it was in the best interests of the child to remain in Singapore to complete his schooling rather than relocate to the United Kingdom, as the child expressed a clear preference to stay and the father's relocation was primarily in his own interest.
XBV v XBU
An appeal against a subsequent order that effectively seeks to challenge an earlier order for which the time to appeal has expired is procedurally defective and devoid of merit.
XLM v XLN
The Singapore court should be slow to intervene in interim maintenance applications when divorce proceedings are pending in another appropriate forum (India).
WVH & Anor v WVG
The court enforced a settlement agreement regarding the deputyship of an elderly person with dementia, finding that the children were the more appropriate deputies for property and affairs, and that the settlement agreement was in the person's best interests.
WPV v WPW
The court held that the division of matrimonial assets, including the timing of CPF refunds, is a matter of judicial discretion, and the result must reflect the final division ratios ordered.