Neo Yiing Piau v Ng Soek Teng

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Shobha G. Nair
• Judgment Date: 30 June 2011
• Neutral Citation: [2011] SGDC 217
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: OSF 65/2011/K
• Year: 2011
• Published date: 01 July 2011
• Hearing Date: 06 April 2011,30 March 2011,23 March 2011,27 April 2011
• Plaintiff Counsel: Mr SK Kumar (Kumar & Associates)
• Defendant Counsel: Ms Lim Say Fang (Tan Lee & Partners)
• Citation: [2011] SGDC 217

District Judge Shobha G Nair:

Section 94(1) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353) prohibits the filing of a writ for divorce before 3 years of marriage have passed. In this case, the husband sought leave from this Court to file such a writ. The law allows for the presentation of a writ before 3 years in a case where exceptional hardship would be faced by the plaintiff if leave were refused or there is exceptional depravity on the part of the defendant. Having heard the parties, I was of the view that the application lacked merit and dismissed the same with no order as to costs. The husband is dissatisfied with the decision and now appeals.

Facts

The parties registered their marriage on 23 October 2008. They continued to live with their respective parents. On 1 January 2009, the couple signed an option to purchase a property in Bishan. It was valued at $643 000 and the vendor was to deliver vacant possession by December 2011. On 21 April 2009 a wedding reception was hosted by the wife’s parents. On 25 April 2009, the customary wedding ceremony took place. Parties started to live together on 25 April 2009 at an apartment in Normanton Park. This property is owned by the wife’s parents. The parents do not live there though there were times when they would stay over at the Normanton apartment.

It was the wife’s position that on 17 November 2009, there was a heated exchange between parties over a phone message sent by the husband to his former girlfriend. The wife left the home to live with her parents as a result. Between May and July 2010, the parties did meet up on occasion to watch a movie or have a meal together. The husband at one time presented 3 options to his wife in respect of housing but the wife was of the view that they should continue to stay at the Normanton apartment. Although some effort was made to reconcile, the parties did not move in a significant way towards this end.

Grounds of Decision

The intention behind s 94(1) of the Women’s Charter is to promote the sanctity of marriage. In cases where there is exceptional hardship suffered by the plaintiff or depravity on the part of the defendant, the Court must not be slow to grant leave. In the often quoted case of Ng Kee Shee v Fu Gaofei¹ the phrase “exceptional hardship” was defined as “something quite out of the ordinary and more than what an ordinary person should reasonably be asked to bear”. Clearly what is exceptional is a matter of degree.

The facts of the case before me stood in sharp contrast to that in Ng Kee Shee v Fu Gaofei. The husband took pains to explain the hardship he faced as a result of this union from the time of the customary wedding ceremony to date....