LITT
Try LITT free
XLX v XLZ and another [2025] SGHCF 56
The court held that an executor is liable to furnish an account on a common basis, and that while the court may make allowances for a lay trustee's accounting, the trustee must provide proper justification and documentation for their actions.
XRM v XRN [2025] SGHCF 55
The court determined that the value of investments in matrimonial assets should be assessed at the date of the Ancillary Matters hearing, and that the doctrine of illegality bars the enforceability of a resulting trust arising from an illegal tax planning purpose.
VBR v VBS [2025] SGHCF 54
The court held that child maintenance should be based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and that personal expenses of a parent should not be a factor in determining child maintenance unless there is a sudden decrease in earnings.
XLM v XLN [2025] SGHCF 53
The Singapore court should be slow to intervene in interim maintenance applications when divorce proceedings are pending in a more appropriate forum (India).
VTP v VTO [2025] SGHCF 52
The court dismissed an application for a further extension of time to file a notice of appeal, emphasizing the importance of finality in litigation and the failure of the applicant to provide strong justification for the delay.
UXL v UXM [2025] SGHCF 51
A lower court or tribunal is not bound by findings of fact made by another court, including the Court of Appeal, if it is obliged to make an independent determination. However, in an application for variation of maintenance, the applicant must show a substantial change of circums
XLK v XLJ [2025] SGHCF 50
The court dismissed an appeal against a custody order, applying the doctrine of comity of nations and finding that it was in the best interests of the child to be with the mother.
XEW v XEV [2025] SGHCF 5
The court held that habitual residence is a question of fact, and temporary absences for business or leisure do not break the continuity of habitual residence if the party maintains a settled purpose and base in the jurisdiction.
XOY v XOZ and another matter [2025] SGHCF 49
In XOY v XOZ [2025] SGHCF 49, the High Court denied spousal maintenance, ruling that the wife's share of matrimonial assets (59:41 split) was sufficient. The court established a direct maintenance regime for the child, emphasizing financial self-sufficiency over long-term dependency.
XII v XIJ [2025] SGHCF 48
The court dismissed the mother's appeal against a decision refusing relocation of the children, finding that the children's best interests were served by remaining in Singapore where they had stable arrangements and where both parents could maintain a close relationship.
WQG v WQF [2025] SGHCF 47
The court held that an ancillary matters order should only be varied if the original order is unworkable, and that lump sum child maintenance is generally inappropriate as it hinders future variations and does not serve the child's best interests.
WVD and others v WUR and others [2025] SGHCF 46
The High Court has the inherent power to order the payment of costs in instalments, even in the absence of express statutory provision.
XPG v XPH [2025] SGHCF 45
The court determined custody, care and control of the child, and divided matrimonial assets based on a 69:31 ratio in favour of the husband, accounting for his pre-marital assets.
VMG v VMH and another matter [2025] SGHCF 44
The court dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of an application for sole care and control, finding no evidence to support the Appellant's claims of the Respondent's unfitness.
XGP [2025] SGHCF 43
The court held that an application to revoke a grant of probate must be commenced as a contentious probate proceeding by way of originating claim under the Family Justice (Probate and Other Matters) Rules 2024, rather than as an originating application (without notice), unless sp
XNM v XNN [2025] SGHCF 42
In XNM v XNN [2025] SGHCF 42, the court awarded an 80:20 matrimonial asset division in the Husband's favour. The decision highlights the court's use of adverse inferences against the Wife for non-disclosure of assets, balancing direct financial contributions against indirect non-financial roles.
XIB v XIA [2025] SGHCF 40
Pre-marital assets are not transformed into matrimonial assets by indirect non-financial contributions unless there is a direct causal link and the contribution has economic value.
XAT v XAU and another [2025] SGHCF 4
The court held that the deceased had testamentary capacity to execute the Will, and that the appellant failed to prove the Will was forged or executed under undue influence.
XJO v XJP and another matter [2025] SGHCF 39
The court affirmed the District Judge's division of matrimonial assets, noting that the appellant failed to provide evidence to support his claims regarding direct and indirect contributions, and that the court's valuation of company shares based on net asset value was appropriat
XCZ v XDA [2025] SGHCF 38
The court held that a shared care and control order was inappropriate for young children requiring routine, and that a loan from a parent to a child for a matrimonial home is a loan to the child alone unless proven otherwise.
XOA v XOB [2025] SGHCF 37
In XOA v XOB [2025] SGHCF 37, the High Court awarded the Wife a 5% uplift in matrimonial asset division due to the Husband's non-compliance with discovery orders. The final ratio was adjusted to 43:57, emphasizing the court's power to draw adverse inferences against parties who conceal assets.
VBL v VBM [2025] SGHCF 36
A consent order for the division of matrimonial assets can be varied or set aside for fraudulent non-disclosure, but such fraud must be proven by compelling evidence. Where a party was aware of the possibility of non-disclosure at the time of settlement, they cannot later seek to
XLV v XLW [2025] SGHCF 35
The court dismissed the wife's appeal against the refusal to stay divorce proceedings, finding that Singapore had a more real and substantial connection to the parties and their children.
XML v XMM [2025] SGHCF 34
The court determined that the marriage was a dual-income marriage and applied the ANJ structured approach for the division of matrimonial assets, finding that the Wife was not the primary homemaker.