TQ v TR
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judge | Choo Han Teck J |
| Judgment Date | 11 July 2007 |
| Neutral Citation | [2007] SGHC 106 |
| Citation | [2007] SGHC 106 |
| Date | 11 July 2007 |
| Year | 2007 |
| Plaintiff Counsel | Foo Siew Fong (Harry Elias Partnership) |
| Docket Number | Divorce (T) No 829 of 2004 |
| Defendant Counsel | Quek Mong Hua SC and Tan Siew Kim (Lee & Lee) |
| Court | High Court (Singapore) |
| Published date | 19 July 2007 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
4 cases
- Aoo v Aon
-
TQ v TR
...5 The judge below (“the Judge”) was asked to decide the ancillary matters. On 11 July 2007, he ordered as follows (see TQ v TR [2007] 3 SLR (R) 719 (“the Judgment”)): (a) Both the Husband and the Wife were to have joint custody of the Children, but the Wife was to have care and control of a......
- Afs v Afu
-
VF v VG
...siblings should, as far as possible, not be separated: see, for example, Wong Phila Mae v Shaw Harold [1991] SLR 93 at 98H and TQ v TR [2007] SGHC 106 at [8]. The rationale for this is that keeping the children together when the parents divorce will provide the children with a measure of st......
5 books & journal articles
-
THE EFFECTIVE REACH OF CHOICE OF LAW AGREEMENTS
...32 However, it is noteworthy that two recent cases in Singapore highlighted the significance of party autonomy in this area. In TQ v TR[2007] 3 SLR 719, a prenuptial agreement was given effect to in accordance with its governing law. An appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. In Muraka......
-
Family Law
...rights. Law governing validity of foreign prenuptial agreement and rights to matrimonial property 14.8 The High Court in TQ v TR[2007] 3 SLR 719 has recognised a foreign prenuptial agreement to be valid and effective. (The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal in January 2008 but the writ......
-
Family Law
...14.1 In last year”s review ((2007) 8 SAL Ann Rev 229 at 231—232, paras 14.8—14.12), it was pointed out that the High Court in TQ v TR[2007] 3 SLR 719 did not apply the established conflict of laws rule in determining the validity of a foreign prenuptial agreement. In that case, a prenuptial......
-
Conflict of Laws
...law”s effect. This is especially important where the law was not settled in the foreign jurisdiction. 9.43 The second case was TQ v TR[2007] 3 SLR 719. The petitioner, a Swedish national, and the respondent, a Dutch national, executed a prenuptial agreement before their marriage in the Neth......
Get Started for Free