Leong Chooi Wan v Tay Wan Fook

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Regina Ow-Chang Yee Lin
• Judgment Date: 13 February 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] SGDC 45
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Year: 2001
• Citation: [2001] SGDC 45
• Court: District Court (Singapore)

Judgment

GROUNDS OF DECISION Cur adv vult

Background

1 The petitioner ("wife") and the respondent ("husband") registered their marriage at the Singapore Marriage Registry on 6 October 1979. They had a son and two daughters, How Boon, Ywee Chieh and Huey Jieh born on 6 March 1981, 9 April 1983 and 21 November 1987, respectively.

2 After the parties were married, they lived in a rented room. Between 1981 and 1988, they lived at rented terrace houses and had their 3 children. In 1988, the husband was sent by his employers to the United States to do his Masters degree and attachment. The whole family accompanied him there. They returned to Singapore in 1991 and again stayed at rented premises until June 1995 when they bought the matrimonial flat at Blk 444 Sin Ming Avenue #04-453, Singapore 570444 (the matrimonial flat).

3 It was not disputed that the husband paid for the purchase of the matrimonial flat. As at 15 November 2000, he had utilised $191,388.70 from his Central Provident Fund (CPF) account, together with accrued interest of $30,896.59 for the purchase. The flat was valued at $400,000.00 on 17 March 2000 by valuers appointed by the wife. The husband did not dispute the valuation.

4 During the course of the marriage, the husband held several jobs. He started off as an engineer with Motorola earning RM1,500 per month. He resigned from Motorola in 1994 and joined Goldtron Telecommunications Company as its deputy managing director, drawing an income of about $18,000.00 per month. He is presently a Production Engineering Manger with Philips Consumer Communications with a monthly salary of $9,800.00 and transport allowance of $500.00 per month. He is 46 years old.

5 The wife was a full time homemaker after the marriage. She is 42 years old. She has the Malaysian equivalent of an "O" level certificate but does not have any work experience, except for some clerical skills acquired when she helped out her father in his business prior to the marriage. The husband did not dispute her efforts in looking after the home or the children.

6 From the beginning of the marriage until October 1996, the wife conceded that the husband had been "a good and dedicated husband and father. He provided for the family and saw to all their needs. He spent time with the family, especially the children."

7 Sometime in October 1996, the wife discovered that the husband had an extra-marital affair with a China girl. The wife became worried that the husband would abandon her and the children. After discovering that the husband had transmitted a sum of $17,000.00 to his mistress, she took it upon herself to withdraw a total sum of $51,000 from their joint accounts. Subsequently, she withdrew another RM80,370.05 from their various Citibank joint accounts in Malaysia.

8 The wife forgave the husband for his affair after he begged her for another chance. The marriage was without incident until sometime in 1998, when the husband broke his word and embarked on another extra-marital affair. This was the proverbial last straw and on 3 July 1998, the wife filed a petition for divorce on the ground that the marriage had broken down irretrievably in that the husband had behaved in such a way that the wife cannot reasonably be expected to live with him. The husband did not contest the amended Petition and the Decree Nisi was granted on 22 December 1998. The issues of custody and access of the children, maintenance for the wife and children and the division of the matrimonial assets were adjourned to be heard in chambers.

9 After the filing of the Divorce Petition, the wife filed a maintenance complaint against the husband. On September 1999, the Court ordered the husband to pay $1,800.00 for the maintenance of the wife and their 2 daughters. In addition, the husband was ordered to continue to support their son and pay all the household bills including the Telecom bills.

10 The ancillary matters came up for hearing before me on 17 November 2000 and 12 December 2000. After reviewing the evidence in the affidavits filed by the wife and the husband, and submissions by Mr Alain Johns for the wife and Mr Tan Kim Chiang for the husband, I made the following orders-

By Consent

1) Petitioner and Respondent to have joint custody of Tay How Boon with care and control to Respondent and liberal access to Petitioner.

2) Petitioner and Respondent to have joint custody of Tay Ywee Chieh and Tay Huay Jieh, with care and control to Petitioner and liberal access to Respondent.

It is ordered that

1) Respondent to pay Petitioner $2,000 for maintenance of Petitioner and their 2 daughters ($800 for eldest daughter, $700 for youngest daughter and $500 for Petitioner) with effect from 15/12/2000 and thereafter on 15^th of each subsequent month. Payment to Petitioner’s POSB account 110-18455-7.

2) Respondent to maintain their son in his care and control.

3) The Respondent to transfer his rights and interest in the matrimonial home at Blk 444 Sin Ming Avenue #04-453, Singapore 570444 to Petitioner upon Petitioner paying him 50% of the value of the flat fixed at $400,000. The Respondent to refund his CPF account the monies utilised for the purchase of the matrimonial home (together with accrued interest) from his share of the matrimonial home.

4) In the alternative, the matrimonial home at Blk 444 Sin Ming Avenue #04-453, Singapore 570444 be sold in the open market and the proceeds be divided equally between the parties. The Respondent to fund his CPF account the monies utilised for the purchase of the matrimonial together with accrued interest from his share of the proceeds.

5) The Respondent do pay to the Petitioner a sum of $200,000 as her share in the other matrimonial assets.

6) Costs fixed at $6,000 and disbursements fixed at $8,000 to be paid by Respondent to Petitioner forthwith.

11 The wife filed an appeal against orders 1, 3, 4 and 5 above.

Maintenance of the daughters

12 The applicable section for the maintenance of the minor child of the marriage can be found in section 127 (1997 Edition) of the Women’s Charter. The provisions in Parts VII and IX also apply. The relevant circumstances which the Court shall have regard to are found in section 69(4), which are as follows:

S69-(4) The court, when ordering maintenance for a ...child under this section shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case including the following matters:

(a) the financial needs of the ...child;

(b) the income, earning capacity (if any), property and other financial resources of the ...child;

(c) any physical or mental disability of the ...child;

(d) ...

(e) ...

(f) the standard of living enjoyed by the ...child before the ...parent... neglected or refused to provide reasonable maintenance for the ...child;

(g) in the case of the child, the manner in which he was being, and in which the parties to the marriage expected him to be, educated or trained;

(h) the conduct of each of the parties to the marriage, if the conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to ignore it.

13 As part of the ancillaries, the wife sought to vary the existing maintenance. Mr Johns submitted that the amount of maintenance should be increased to $1,200.00 and $1,300.00 for the maintenance of Ywee Chieh and Huey Jieh, respectively on the ground that circumstances have changed since the last order was made.

14 The wife stated in her affidavit that the monthly expenses of the daughters were as follows:

	Expenses	Ywee Chieh	Huey Jieh
a)	Clothes/shoes	100	100
b)	Food	480	485
c)	Transport	65	65
d)	Medical/Dental	40	40
e)	Household	150	150
f)	School fees/tuition	66	160
g)	Books and magazines	25	25
h)	Stationery	18	20
i)	ECA/School activities	35	35
j)	Personal grooming	26	15
k)	Entertainment	20	20
l)	Holiday	65	65
m)	Piano tuning	-	10
n)	Pet maintenance	10	10
o)	Insurance (estimate)	100	100
TOTAL		$1,200	$1,300

15 The husband disagreed with the wife’s claim for increased maintenance for the daughters and wanted the existing order of $1,800.00 to remain. He would continue to support their son, How Boon.

16 The husband disputed the above expenses saying that they were inflated and excessive. There was no documentary proof tendered in support of the expenses.

17 I found that the expenses set out in paragraph 8 above were reasonable save for items (a), (b) and (e). With regard to item (a), $100.00 per month for clothes and shoes is extravagant. A reasonable figure would be $50.00.

18 As for item (b), $480.00 or $16.00 per day for food for each child was excessive. As the wife was a housewife, it was reasonable to assume that she cooked for the children at home. A reasonable figure would be $300.00 per month per child.

19 As for item (e), Mr Johns clarified that this item was for toiletries. $150.00 per month for such items was clearly inflated as these expenses were probably bi-monthly or quarterly expenses. An appropriate figure would be $20 per month.

20 I also disregarded items (m), (n) and (o). The husband should not be maintaining pets or the piano. Insurance is a form of savings and not a necessary expense.

21 In the circumstances, the revised list of expenses for the 2 daughters is as follows:

	Expense item	Ywee Chieh		Hueh Jieh
		Claimed	Revised	Claimed	Revised
a)	Clothes/shoes	$100	$ 50	$100	$ 50
b)	Food	$480	$300	$485	$300
c)	Transport	$ 65	$ 65	$ 65	$ 65
d)	Medical/Dental	$ 40	$ 40	$ 40	$ 40
e)	Household	$150	$ 20	$150	$ 20
f)	School fees/tuition	$ 66	$ 66	$160	$160
g)	Books/magazines	$ 25	$ 25	$ 25	$ 25
h)	Stationery	$ 18	$ 18	$ 20	$ 20
i)	ECA/School activities	$ 35	$ 35	$ 35	$ 35
j)	Personal grooming	$ 26	$ 26	$ 15	$ 15
k)	Entertainment	$ 20	$ 20	$ 20	$ 20
l)	Ho...