Chia Puay Hoong v Ng Hoon Teik

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Shobha G. Nair
• Judgment Date: 08 March 2002
• Neutral Citation: [2002] SGDC 41
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Year: 2002
• Citation: [2002] SGDC 41
• Court: District Court (Singapore)

Judgment

GROUNDS OF DECISION

This case involved a complete and defiant refusal by a husband and father to provide any maintenance for his estranged wife and his only child since September 2000 when the wife left the matrimonial home with the child. Interim custody, care and control of the child had been granted by an Order of Court to the wife with access to the husband. This was an application by the wife for maintenance under sections 69(1) and (2) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 323) for herself and the only child of the marriage, respectively. She had sought maintenance of $ 2 795 per month from her husband and requested that this be backdated to the time she had left the matrimonial home. Having considered the evidence presented by the parties, I ordered that the husband pay a sum of $2 500 per month as maintenance for the wife and child with effect from December 2001. The Court also exercised its discretion under section 79(4) of the Women’s Charter to order that the husband pay costs fixed at $2000. Against these orders, the husband now appeals. Set out below are the reasons for my decisions.

Background

2. The parties were married in August 1995 and have a three year old daughter named Y. Trouble in the marriage surfaced as early as 1997 when the wife was pregnant with the couple’s child. She told the Court that she had stopped working during the advanced stages of her pregnancy which made her husband very unhappy because she was not able to contribute financially to the family. The wife spoke about having been neglected and bullied by the Respondent (paragraphs 7-8 of C1), his displeasure with her providing a monthly allowance to her family and spending time with her family (even during the time she attended to her sick grandmother in hospital and made arrangements for her funeral).

3. The wife spoke of how her husband constantly looked down on her family who is not highly educated, reminding her constantly that she enjoyed a comfortable lifestyle only because she was married to him. He would remind her that although they were joint owners of a house known as [address]d , she was living under his roof and accused her of not contributing towards the home (paragraph 12 of C1).

4. After Y was born, the husband encouraged her to become a property agent because he felt that property agents earned lucrative incomes and when she did, he started to feel that she was not looking after his and the child’s welfare adequately. The wife stated that she felt that his unhappiness was really about her not bringing in a healthy income. He insisted that she become a secretary instead so that there would be some form of stability of income. When the wife decided to continue with her work as a property agent as it afforded her with flexibility in terms of time which could be spent with her child, the husband was furious and stopped her from using the family car which she required for her "property work" (paragraph 14 of C1).

5. The relationship deteriorated to a point that the couple stopped sharing a room. While the husband occupied the master bedroom, the wife shared the room occupied by the maid (paragraph 16 of C1). To avoid arguments which were becoming a constant feature in their lives, the wife decided to stay out until the husband went to bed which resulted in the husband locking the doors so that the wife had to beg to be let in. There were occasions when she had to spend the night out of the house. The final straw came when the wife felt that her husband was beginning to isolate the child from her and control the amount of time mother and child spent with each other. She told her husband of her intention to leave the matrimonial home. Not sensing any attempts to change his behaviour, she decided to leave the home with the child on 14^th September 2000. She moved into and is still residing (with her child) at her brother’s home. Her brother and his family are living in a five-room HDB flat along Choa Chu Kang Street 54.

6. The wife took out an application for interim custody, care and control of the child in the same month of her departure and was granted the same in December 2000. The husband put in an application to vary the access times given to him and was granted the same by an Order of Court dated 19 February 2001 (the orders are exhibited as CPH-1 in C1).

7. The husband’s first affidavit (R1) begins by stating in rather exhaustive detail the financial arrangements he has entered into in repaying two housing loans taken out on the Kovan Road property and another private apartment known as 32 Jalan Rajah #18-02 Rajah Towers (hereinafter "Jalan Rajah apartment") respectively. He spoke of how he bore a huge financial burden in having to handle the repayment by himself and how his current "take-home" income of $7 386 per month and rental income of $2 400 per month derived from the leasing out of the jalan rajah property was simply insufficient to meet his monthly expenses of $13 800.42 (paragraph 6 of R1).

8. The husband had not provided any money for his wife and child since they left the matrimonial home in September 2000. He claimed that at the stage when interim custody, care and control of the child was applied for by the wife, he never received any request for maintenance. He claimed that before the application for maintenance was filed by the wife in these Courts, he did not receive any request from the wife’s solicitors for maintenance for his wife and child. Yet, in his affidavits and for the most part of the hearing, he took on the position that he was not willing to provide any maintenance as he had huge financial obligations and that he "hardly had enough money for meaningful savings" (paragraph 17 of R1) and that the wife had always taken care of her and the child’s needs.

9. The husband claimed that he did not drive or force the wife out of the matrimonial home and that he "did not at any time behave in such a way that she finds it intolerable to live with me within the meaning of Section 95(3)(b) of the Women’s Charter Chapter 353…….There is no good reason or just cause for her to leave the matrimonial home. By leaving the matrimonial home she causes disruptions in all aspects of our family life including the financial aspect" (paragraph 14 of R1). He complained of a change in his wife’s daily routine since July 2000 in the sense that she stopped taking her meals at home and refused to listen to him when he suggested that she rearrange her business appointments so that she could spend time at home. He claimed that his "pleas" were dismissed by her. He also claimed to have "pleaded" with his wife to consult a professional marriage counsellor but his wife claimed that they were incompatible (paragraph 13 of R1).

10. The husband then spoke about having gone to the wife’s brother’s home (which she had moved into) on 9^th August 2001 to pick up his daughter. He claimed to have been assaulted by his wife’s brother when an argument between his wife and him broke out over when he would return their child. The husband had taken out a personal protection order against the wife’s brother and he claimed that both his wife and her brother had retaliated by filing applications for personal protection orders against him as an act of vengeance. He also saw the wife’s application for maintenance as "primarily an act of vengeance" (paragraph 18 of R1).

11. The wife is 34 years of age and works as a property agent with Assets Real-Link Network Pte Ltd with an average "take home" pay of $2 346 per month. Her income is not regular nor guaranteed. The economic recession and the consequent depression of the property market in December 2001, when this application was heard, had caused a dip in her monthly income. Prior to taking on work as a property agent, she had worked as an insurance agent from 1989 to early 2001. For a period of three years (between 1998-early 2001) she was working as an insurance and property agent.

12. Since moving out of the matrimonial home, her savings were utilised to maintain herself and her child and had thus, been substantially depleted (pages 41-42 of exhibit CPH-5, C1). She had no other sources of income and had no financial assets she could draw from. She drives a second-hand "Rover" 216 which has not been fully paid for and her intention to sell the same to cut costs was impractical as she would make substantial losses in the current climate.

13. The husband, 41 years of age, is a Senior Engineering Manager with Seagate Technology International (hereinafter "Seagate"). He has been with the company for 10 years. His "take home" pay is $7, 386 per month. In addition to this, he receives an annual bonus and on a quarterly basis, he receives what is known as "corporate" and "local" profits. He stated that the corporate and local profits were given only if the company performs well and that it was unlikely that he would be receiving any in the next quarter. In addition to his take-home pay, he receives $2 400 per month from the leasing out of the Jalan Rajah apartment. He is currently staying by himself in the matrimonial home at Kovan Road. Both the properties were purchased in 1995 and are jointly owned by husband and wife.

14. The Respondent claimed to have 3 active bank accounts in his sole name with a balance of $25 740.38 (POSB savings account), $4 726.06 (UOB account) and $4 237.5 (OCBC Ltd account). He drives a fully paid for 10 year old BMW 520i which he purchased in 2000. He also declared having some shares/investments. Both parties had a few insurance policies in their names.

The Law

Maintenance for wives

15. Section 69(1) of the Women’s Charter states:

"Any married woman whose husband neglects or refuses to provide her reasonable maintenance may apply to a District Court or a Magistrate’s Court and that Court may, on due proof thereof, order the husband to pay a monthly allowance or a lump sum for her maintenance."

Duty of parents to maintain...