TEE v TEF
Court | Family Court (Singapore) |
Judge | Sowaran Singh |
Judgment Date | 08 June 2015 |
Neutral Citation | [2015] SGFC 80 |
Citation | [2015] SGFC 80 |
Hearing Date | 26 March 2015,19 May 2015 |
Published date | 02 September 2015 |
Docket Number | Divorce Suit No. 2236 of 2012, SUM 1583/2015 |
Plaintiff Counsel | Ms. Lim Poh Choo (M/s Alan Shankar & Lim LLC) |
Defendant Counsel | Ms. Ng Hui-Li Felicia/Ms.Rapinder Kaur (M/s COMLAW LLC) |
Subject Matter | Catchwords: Family Law,ancillary proceedings,Family Law,division of matrimonial assets |
The Plaintiff (wife/mother) and the Defendant (husband/father) married in May 1984 and have a daughter from the union who is now an adult1. It was a long marriage. On the 10 May 2012 the wife filed for a divorce based on the husband’s unreasonable behaviour. The husband was described2 as being 50 year-old country manager whilst the wife was a 50-year-old distribution manager. Interim Judgment (IJ) was granted on the 23 July 2012 and the ancillaries which were adjourned to Chambers came up for hearing on the 19 May 2015.
In the Statement of Particulars (SOP) the wife averred that the husband did not bother to show any concern for their daughter and did not bother to spend time with them. From Mondays to Fridays he was in Malaysia and on weekends when in Singapore he spent most of his time on the golf course or other activities outside the home. He did not care for their daughter and hardly exchanged 10 sentences with the child throughout the weekend when in Singapore. Whenever she tried to make conversation with him, he would accuse her of prying into his affairs. When she cooked for the family he told her to stop wasting her time. He earned about $10,000 (net) monthly and yet he used her monies for the household expenses and his overdraft. He refused to account to her for his expenses. She found out that he spent on another woman in Malaysia and even checked into hotels as well as went for holidays with this lady. The parties had invested their monies in Malaysian properties which were in the husband’s sole name and he disposed of them without informing/consulting her.
One day before the hearing on the 18 May 2015 the wife made an application in
On the 2 June 2015, the husband filed an appeal against the court’s decision relating only to its orders on the division of the matrimonial home (the home), the division of the husband’s CPF funds and the sale of the club (xxx) membership. The court will now deal with these issues. As the court’s other orders are not being appealed against the evidence relating thereto need not be alluded to in these grounds in detail or at all.
The Parties Positions in Brief as in their 1st AOM’s3The husband in his 1st AOM4 declared that as a country manager his gross income was $10,700 and he took home $9,799. He was also paid a month’s bonus in June 2012 and a 13th month bonus was paid earlier in the year. In addition, he received a transport allowance of $900 and a housing allowance (for Malaysia) of $666. Apart from this he had a rental income of A$310 per week from an Australian property. This fully paid up property was in their joint names and its value was $364,000. The agent in Australia collected the rent and paid all the expenses on their behalf. The net rent was paid into their ANZ bank account held jointly in their names. They had an apartment in Singapore at xxx (the home) which was valued at $900,000 and the outstanding mortgage loan stood at $196,075. He had used for this apartment a sum of $386,638 from his CPF funds and the accrued interest was $123,638.A sum of $1,500 was deducted from his CPF account for this loan and another $1,462 from the wife’s CPF account. He had a piece of vacant land in xxx (the land) held by a Malaysian friend of his one xxx (xxx) and its estimated value was $40,000. There was also a condominium unit in his sole name in xxx, Malaysia (xxx) and its estimated value was $152,000 and there was an outstanding mortgage loan of $51,480. He owned 3 vehicles namely a xxx valued at $80,000 (hire purchase outstanding: $88,826), a xxx valued at $46,000 (hire purchase outstanding: $37,740) and a xxx registered car valued at $23,200 (not on hire purchase).
He also had 4 insurance policies with surrender values of $40,571 (xxx), $37,555 (xxx paid from CPF), $15,000 (xxx) and a personal accident policy with xxx which had a nil surrender value. He had shares in xxx a company started by his father and the shares were given to him before their marriage and did not form part of the matrimonial assets. He also had 177 xxx shares worth about $600 bought with his CFP Investment Account. In his 6 Singapore bank accounts (one of which was xxx joint current account with the wife) he had some $20,562. In his 3 xxx bank accounts he had some $58,838 and in their 3 xxx joint bank accounts there was some $27,454. In his CPF accounts he had xxx. He also had another vehicle No. xxx with an estimated value of $100,000 which was inherited through his father from his grandfather. His xxx club membership was worth $230,000 and the xxx at $4,000. His monthly expenses added up to more than $11,586 out of which $1,040 was for the insurance policies, more than $1,000 for petrol/car related expenses, $675 for his “
The Malaysian and Australian properties were bought with cash and bank loans. The cash was taken from the “
He listed out his indirect financial and non-financial contributions which included the following:
He offered to transfer his rights in the home to the wife upon her paying the outstanding mortgage loan and refunding a sum of $150,000 to his CPF account (partial refund) and bear the transfer expenses. She could keep all the monies in her xxx, xxx accounts, all shares /investments in her name and all jewellery in her possession as well as the club membership in her name (xxx). He would keep all the Malaysian properties, monies in Malaysian banks, the xxx club memberships, the car xxx and the Mercedes Benz. He would discharge all the liabilities for these assets. The Australian property would be sold and they agreed and the net sales proceed divided equally. Pending the sale the income generated less all outgoings would also be equally shared. The monies in the xxx bank would be divided equally. There was to be no maintenance for the wife as she was self-sufficient. For their daughter he would pay $1,000 for her monthly maintenance until she completed her tertiary education as well as her school/course fees for her local tertiary education up to her first university degree. He asked for joint custody of their daughter with care and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
TEE v TEF
...These Grounds of Decision are supplementary to those given on the 8 June 2015 in HCF/DCA No.90 of 2015 and which are reported at [2015] SGFC 80. Those Grounds (the previous GD) were rendered on account of an appeal filed by the Defendant on the 2 June 2015. Subsequently, the Plaintiff filed......