Ng Soon Guan v Neo Ah Poo
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judge | Masayu Norashikin |
| Judgment Date | 28 November 2014 |
| Neutral Citation | [2014] SGDC 443 |
| Court | District Court (Singapore) |
| Docket Number | Divorce Court Petition No.4465 of 2013 |
| Published date | 09 December 2014 |
| Year | 2014 |
| Hearing Date | 16 September 2014 |
| Plaintiff Counsel | Ms. Shalini d/o Mogan (Gateway Law Corporation) |
| Defendant Counsel | Ms Gomez Winnifred (Gomez) |
| Subject Matter | Catchwords: Family law division of matrimonial assets share of rental income from matrimonial flat,Family law maintenance of ex-wife lump sum maintenance from rental income,Family law effect of separation on division of matrimonial assets |
| Citation | [2014] SGDC 443 |
Parties registered their marriage on 9 May 1991. There is one child of the marriage, a daughter, who was three years old at the time of the marriage. The Plaintiff husband filed for divorce relying on the fact that parties had been living separately since about March 2003. The Defendant wife did not file any Defence and Interim Judgment for the divorce was granted on 30 October 2013.
I heard the ancillary matters in this case which involved division of the matrimonial assets and maintenance for the Defendant wife, and made the following orders:-
The Plaintiff husband appealed against my orders on the division of the flat and costs. I set out below the reasons for my decision.
At the time of separation, the daughter was about fourteen years old. It appears from both parties’ evidence that they both moved on in their lives and each acquired another partner after the separation. The HDB flat was acquired in 2002, about a year before the separation in 2003. The Defendant wife and daughter continued to stay in the HDB flat whilst the Plaintiff moved out. The reasons for the Plaintiff moving out are disputed. The Plaintiff stopped contributing to the mortgage payments from around 2003 or at least 2 years from the time the flat was purchased. Thereafter, the Defendant alone paid the mortgage instalments by cash.
Parties’ direct financial contributions to the flat were in the proportion 38% by the Plaintiff husband and 62% by the Defendant wife.
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
The Plaintiff said he is a painter with a take home salary of $960. For the first eleven years or so of the marriage, the family had stayed in a rented flat for $90, the rent for which he paid. He also paid the utilities bills and household expenses, whilst the Defendant was a housewife. He claimed that he walked the daughter to primary school daily, at times dropped her off by taxi when it rained and gave her pocket money. He said that he continued to provide for her financially during her secondary school years. No details are given as to how he did so. The Plaintiff further said that he helped out with household chores, did the laundry and ironed the clothes when the Defendant was busy with other things, bought toiletries and groceries, and did minor repair and maintenance to the current matrimonial flat when he was living there.
The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant went out for karaoke and drinking, and had improper associations with other men from around the year 2000. This was denied by the Defendant.
The Plaintiff’s evidence was that the Defendant has had rent-free occupation of the flat all these years from 2003, and that she stayed there with her partner, the child of the marriage, and the Defendant’s children from her previous marriage. The Plaintiff also alleged that the Defendant had admitted to renting out the flat and had collected rental income for at least 4 years. The Plaintiff submitted that he should be given a half share of the alleged rent collected by the Defendant for renting out the HDB flat for 4 years. By his calculation, she had collected a sum of $96,000, being $2,000 a month for 4 years (48 months).
The Defendant, on the other hand, had to stay outside and incur rental. His evidence was that he was staying in his brother’s flat with his seventy-eight-year old mother, his widowed elder sister and her daughter. His brother was in jail in Dubai and his sister was not working. Before the sister and niece moved in in February 2014, he had to pay the monthly mortgage payments (or part thereof, depending on his finances) of $523 for his brother’s house in cash, household utilities and town council fees. After his niece moved in, she contributed towards part of the mortgage payments.
The Plaintiff asked for the flat to be sold and the balance sale proceeds, after repayment of the mortgage, refund to parties’ CPF accounts and payment of costs and expenses of sale, be divided 60:40 in his favour. In other words, in addition to his direct financial contributions amounting to 38% for the purchase of the flat, he sought an additional 22% share for his indirect contributions, the Defendant’s occupation of the flat since 2003 and his share of the alleged rental income. He also asked for each party to keep his/her own assets, and that there be no order as to maintenance for the Defendant.
Defendant wife’s caseThe Defendant said that during the subsistence of the marriage the Plaintiff hardly contributed financially to the family. He always indicated that he did not have any money and only occasionally gave the Defendant about $50 to last a month, which he would take back when he was financially strapped. The Defendant had to borrow from her family and friends to pay the household bills. The Plaintiff did make initial payments for the flat from his CPF account. After parties bought the HDB flat, he came home only as and when he liked. He washed his hands off the family...
To continue reading
Request your trial