Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley
Jurisdiction | Singapore |
Judge | Lai Siu Chiu J |
Judgment Date | 30 July 2010 |
Neutral Citation | [2010] SGHC 214 |
Court | High Court (Singapore) |
Docket Number | Divorce Petition No 925 of 2006 (Registrar’s Appeal from the Subordinate Courts No 17 of 2010) |
Published date | 18 July 2014 |
Year | 2010 |
Hearing Date | 26 May 2010 |
Plaintiff Counsel | Daljit Kaur d/o Harbans Singh (N S Kang) |
Defendant Counsel | Respondent in person. |
Subject Matter | Family Law |
Citation | [2010] SGHC 214 |
This was a Registrar’s Appeal (“the appeal”) that arose out of the ancillary orders made in divorce proceedings between the parties. The appellant Lim Cheok Kwang (“the husband”) was appealing against the decision of the district judge who had ordered,
After hearing the parties’ submissions, I allowed the appeal and made the following orders:
As the wife has filed Notice of Appeal (in Civil Appeal No 93 of 2010) against the orders I made, I shall now set out the reasons for my decision.
BackgroundThe husband is 53 years old and the wife is 52 years old. The parties were married on 22 March 1997 at the Singapore Registry of Marriages when they were about 40 and 39 years old respectively. There are no children from the marriage.
Divorce proceedings were commenced by the husband on 7 March 2006 on the ground that the marriage had broken down irretrievably due to the wife’s unreasonable behaviour. Initially the proceedings were contested. Subsequently, the parties agreed to amend the ground of divorce to state that the marriage had broken down irretrievably in that the parties had lived separately for four years. The decree
The husband is a construction safety officer and is drawing a monthly salary of $2,000. The wife is currently unemployed. Prior to the marriage, the wife was working as a property agent and had an income of about $50,000 a year. The wife claimed that she had stopped work to look after the household. The husband disputed that contending that she continued to work periodically.
The Parties’ Assets The husband has the following assets:
As for the wife, the following were/are her assets:
The husband has no known creditors. As for the wife, she owes $21,000 to Great Eastern Life Insurance. It was noted that the wife used to own a HDB flat at Rivervale Street (near Sengkang) with her mother (“Rivervale”). She bought Rivervale in 1996, one year before the marriage. She sold the flat on 27 May 2003.
Ascertaining the Matrimonial AssetsSection 112 of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) (“the Women’s Charter”) gives the court the power to order the division between the parties of any matrimonial asset. Unless the property is a matrimonial asset, it is not subject to the court’s power of division. Section 112(10) of the Women’s Charter defines “matrimonial asset” as follows:
(10) In this section, “matrimonial asset” means —
(a) any asset acquired before the marriage by one party or both parties to the marriage —(i) ordinarily used or enjoyed by both parties or one or more of their children while the parties are residing together for shelter or transportation or for household, education, recreational, social or aesthetic purposes; or(ii) which has been substantially improved during the marriage by the other party or by both parties to the marriage; and(b) any other asset of any nature acquired during the marriage by one party or both parties to the marriage,but does not include any asset (not being a matrimonial home) that has been acquired by one party at any time by gift or inheritance and that has not been substantially improved during the marriage by the other party or by both parties to the marriage.
The Choa Chu Kang flat was purchased by the husband in March 1992, five years before the marriage, in his and his late mother’s name. However, the wife moved into the flat immediately after the parties were married and has lived there since. The wife was listed as an occupier of the matrimonial flat on 23 June 2003. The flat was the matrimonial home and constituted a “matrimonial asset” pursuant to s 112(10)(a)(i) of the Women’s Charter.
Most of the shares owned by the husband were acquired in 1998,
Under s 112(2) of the Women’s Charter, in deciding the manner of division of matrimonial assets, the court is to have regard to all the circumstances of the case, including,
The matrimonial flat was purchased by the husband and is currently in the husband’s sole name. The husband was also the sole financial contributor to the outgoings of the matrimonial flat; he was the one who paid for utilities, the conservancy charges and the property tax. It was clear that the wife had not made any direct contribution...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Zhou Lijie v Wang Chengxiang
...equitable division of the matrimonial assets. In contrast, the defendant relied on the case of Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley [2010] SGHC 214 (“Lim Cheok Kwang”) to contend that the plaintiff was only entitled to a 15% share of the matrimonial assets. In that case, the parties wer......
-
Acy v Acz
...Siew Lin v Oh Choon [2013] SGHC 25 (refd) Lee Yu Hou v Nam Lian Hiang [2011] SGDC 394 (refd) Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley [2010] SGHC 214 (refd) Oh Choon v Lee Siew Lin [2014] 1 SLR 629 (refd) Ong Boon Huat Samuel v Chan Mei Lan Kristine [2007] 2 SLR (R) 729; [2007] 2 SLR 729 (f......
-
TFU v TFV
...marriage. Andrew Phang J (as he then was) awarded the wife 35% of the matrimonial assets. In Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley [2010] SGHC 214, the parties were officially married for 13 years but they separated 3 years before their divorce. The effective duration of the marriage was......
-
TDZ v TEA
...affair and was disinterested in married life. The defendant relied on the cases of Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley [2010] SGHC 214, Leong Mei Chuan v David Chan Teck Hock [2001] SGHC 80 and Leong Kwek Keong v Lee Ying Kuan [1990] 1 SLR(R) 112 to support his position that the period......
-
Family Law
...contributions to the overall assets and welfare of the family. [emphasis added] 15.44 In Lim Cheok Kwang v Chew Fong Heng Shirley [2010] SGHC 214 (‘Lim Cheok Kwang’), the parties, who had no children, were married for 13 years before they divorced. The High Court noted that the marital rela......