LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

WTS v WTR and another appeal [2024] SGHCF 33

The court affirmed the division of matrimonial assets in a single-income marriage and clarified the treatment of pre-marital assets and dissipation of matrimonial funds.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

WVN v WVO [2024] SGHCF 32

The court applied the 'time rule' to pro-rate stock options (PSUs) for inclusion in the matrimonial pool, using the period from the grant date to the IJ date as the numerator and the period from the grant date to the vesting date as the denominator.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WYQ v Child Protector [2024] SGHCF 31

The court affirmed the order for children to be placed in a place of safety under the Children and Youth Protection Act, finding that the mother was unable to properly care for or supervise them and that the appeal lacked merit.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

XBW v XBX and another [2024] SGHCF 30

The court held that an interim independent administrator should be appointed pending the resolution of a probate action to maintain the status quo and preserve the movable assets of the estate.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

WQT v WQU [2024] SGHCF 3

Access orders for a child should be varied to increase time if travel time encroaches on bonding, but serious allegations of misconduct require remittal for new evidence to be tested.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

VRJ v VRK [2024] SGHCF 29

In VRJ v VRK [2024] SGHCF 29, the Singapore High Court ordered the sale of Australian properties with a 60:40 asset split favoring the wife. The court also mandated a S$375,142.90 lump sum payment for maintenance arrears, clarifying principles on retrospective support and matrimonial asset division.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

WWI v WWJ [2024] SGHCF 28

The court dismissed the appeal against the trial judge's finding that the 2nd and 3rd Wills were invalid due to lack of testamentary capacity, upholding the 1st Will as the valid testamentary instrument.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

WWM v WWN and another appeal [2024] SGHCF 27

The court held that the parties' direct contributions to the matrimonial home and joint accounts must be accurately accounted for in the division of matrimonial assets, and that the court has discretion to exclude non-substantial sums from the matrimonial pool.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WWG v WWH [2024] SGHCF 26

An injunction to restrain the disposal of a matrimonial asset will only be granted if the applicant can show that the disposal would prejudice them, specifically by demonstrating that there are insufficient remaining assets to satisfy their likely share of the matrimonial pool.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

WUI v WUJ [2024] SGHCF 25

In short, childless marriages, indirect contributions are not necessarily irrelevant, and the court must assess the facts of the case rather than relying solely on heuristic labels.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WXW v WXX [2024] SGHCF 24

In WXW v WXX [2024] SGHCF 24, the Singapore High Court ordered a 60:40 division of a S$7.79M matrimonial pool. The court rejected an 80:20 split, affirming that a 60:40 ratio appropriately balances financial and homemaking contributions in long marriages, even when traditional gender roles are rever

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

WRU v WRT [2024] SGHCF 23

In WRU v WRT [2024] SGHCF 23, the High Court allowed the mother's appeal to relocate children to the US. The court ruled that relocation benefits outweighed reduced physical access, provided robust remote contact and annual visit arrangements were established to protect the father-child bond.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

WXA v WXB [2024] SGHCF 22

The court held that shared care and control is not a default arrangement and depends on the welfare of the child, and that the court will not draw an adverse inference for belated disclosure if the party eventually discloses the asset.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WSY v WSX and another appeal [2024] SGHCF 21

In WSY v WSX [2024] SGHCF 21, the High Court partially allowed both parties' appeals, adjusting matrimonial asset division and child maintenance. The ruling clarifies the inclusion of sole-name assets, the use of cash for maintenance payments, and the apportionment of child support based on needs.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

WJZ v WJY [2024] SGHCF 2

The court held that the default operative date for ascertaining the matrimonial pool and assessing contributions is the date of the interim judgment, and that assets acquired during the marriage using matrimonial funds constitute matrimonial assets even if acquired after separati

Sushant Shukla· ·11 min read
Singapore

VEW v VEV [2024] SGHCF 19

The court will not disturb a lower court's exercise of discretion regarding child education arrangements unless there are compelling reasons that the move is in the children's best interests.

Sushant Shukla· ·11 min read
Singapore

WQX v WQW and another appeal [2024] SGHCF 18

Adultery in divorce proceedings can be proved on a balance of probabilities, and the higher standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is not required for such findings in Singapore.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

WVS v WVT [2024] SGHCF 17

The court determined the division of matrimonial assets based on direct and indirect contributions, and maintained sole care and control of the children with the husband.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

VZJ v VZK [2024] SGHCF 16

In VZJ v VZK [2024] SGHCF 16, the High Court granted a divorce, awarding sole care and control to the wife. The court ordered the husband to pay monthly child maintenance and a $71,400 lump sum for backdated arrears, while clarifying the distinction between essential needs and luxuries.

Sushant Shukla· ·6 min read
Singapore

WUP v WUQ [2024] SGHCF 15

In a short-lived marriage where the defendant made no financial or indirect contribution to the matrimonial assets, the court ordered that each party retain their own assets and awarded a nominal lump sum maintenance.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

VEG v VEF [2024] SGHCF 14

The court held that there was no material change in circumstances warranting a variation of maintenance orders, noting that the respondent failed to provide full and frank disclosure of her financial assets.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WQG v WQF [2024] SGHCF 13

The court held that personal liabilities incurred during the marriage should be included in the pool of matrimonial assets, regardless of whether they were incurred for the benefit of the family.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

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.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

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.

Sushant Shukla· ·4 min read