UAX v UAY

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Wong Keen Onn
• Judgment Date: 19 April 2017
• Neutral Citation: [2017] SGFC 55
• Court: Family Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Divorce Suit No 3089 of 2014
• Year: 2017
• Published date: 06 May 2017
• Hearing Date: 29 November 2016,23 January 2017,11 January 2017,13 September 2016
• Plaintiff Counsel: Ms Tan Gee Tuan (M/s Gee Tuan Tan)
• Defendant Counsel: Nigel Desmond Pereira with Ada Chua (Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP)
• Subject Matter: Family Law,Division,Matrimonial Assets,Maintenance,wife,children
• Citation: [2017] SGFC 55

District Judge Wong Keen Onn: Introduction

The Plaintiff had appealed against part of the orders on the division of matrimonial assets and maintenance for herself and two children of the marriage.

Brief Facts

The Plaintiff (“wife”) and the Defendant (“husband”) were married on 27 September 2001. The parties met each other in 2000 when they were working at xxx Wholesale Centre and were involved in the fresh produce wholesale trade. The husband was then working at his parent’s wholesale business while the wife was then working for a different fruit wholesaler. In year 2010, they both left their respective jobs in the wholesale industry to join the teaching profession. The Plaintiff wife is 44 years of age and is now employed as a secondary school teacher earning a net monthly income of $6,780.45 and a take home salary of $5,722.45¹. The Defendant husband is 42 years old and works as a primary school teacher earning a gross salary of $6,228.05 and a net take home pay of $5,241.05². They have 2 children of the marriage, namely, B, aged 14 years, female, (born on 22 November 2002) (“B”) who is in Secondary 2 and C, 9 years old (male, born on 28 December 2006) (“C”) who is in Primary 2.

On 3 July 2014, the wife commenced divorce proceedings against the husband on grounds of adultery and his unreasonable behaviour. On 12 August 2014, the husband filed a defence and counterclaim on the basis of the wife’s unreasonable behaviour. In that month of August 2014, the husband had left the matrimonial flat. Subsequently, the husband withdrew his defence and counterclaim on 26 August 2015. Interim Judgment was granted on 23 September 2015 on the ground that the marriage had irretrievably broken down by the fact that the Defendant husband had committed adultery and had behaved unreasonably. This is a 14 year marriage till the date of the Interim Judgment. The ancillary matters on (a) custody, care and control of and access to children of the marriage (b) division of the matrimonial home and other matrimonial assets (c) maintenance for the wife and children and (d) costs were adjourned to Chambers.

Pending the divorce proceedings, the wife applied for interim maintenance for the two children in MSS 5315/2014. She sought a sum of $6,029 per month for the two children. On 24 April 2015, the Court ordered the husband to pay a sum of $2,600.00 per month as maintenance for the two children of the marriage (MO 311/2015). At that time, the husband continued to pay for the monthly instalments for the family car which was used to bring the children to and from school and to the enrichment classes³.

The Ancillary Orders

The wife filed 2 Affidavit of Assets and Means dated 30 October 2015 and 22 July 2016 (marked as P1 and P2 respectively) and 2 Affidavits in response to Request for Interrogatories dated 22 January and 14 July 2016 (marked P3 and P4 respectively). The Defendant husband also filed 2 Affidavit of Assets and Means dated 30 October 2015 and 25 July 2016, an Affidavit in response to Request for Interrogatories dated 27 January 2016 and a Covering Affidavit dated 19 August 2016 (marked as D1, D2, D3, D4 respectively). The Defendant’s father E has also filed an affidavit on 3 June 2016 (marked as D5)

In respect of written submissions, the Plaintiff (“wife”) filed 3 submissions on 5 September, 11 October, 18 November and 17 December 2016 (marked as PS-1, PS-2, PS-3 and PS-4 respectively). The Defendant (“husband”) filed these 5 written submissions on 6 September, 11 October, 19 October, 18 November and 16 December 2016 (marked as DS-1, DS-2, DS-3, DS-4 and DS-5 respectively).

The ancillary matters came before me for hearing. One of the issues was whether the husband’s 60 % share in a HDB shop house at xxx was held on trust for his father and therefore would not be regarded as a matrimonial asset for the purposes of division. A related issue was whether the Family Justice Court could deal with the trust issue relating to real property with a third party. At first, the husband obtained an adjournment of the hearing in order to make an application to the High Court to seek a declaration that the 60% share (the “Share”) in the commercial shop house at xxx (the “said property” or “xxx”) was held by him on trust for his father and that his father was the beneficial owner of the said share in the said property. However, on 18 October 2016, the husband wrote to the Court to say that he no longer intended to make such an application to the High Court⁴.

At the resumed hearing and after reading the affidavits and hearing the evidence and the submissions from both counsel, I made the final ancillary order. On the Plaintiff’s request, the parties then came back on 23 January 2017 to clarify the Orders made. The Ancillary Order of court is reproduced below for easy reference:

“By Consent, it is ordered that: (1) The Plaintiff and Defendant shall have joint custody of the two children of the marriage, namely B, aged 13 years (female, B.C. No. xxx, Date of Birth: 22 November 2002) and C, aged 9 years (male, B.C. No, xxx, Date of Birth: 28 December 2006) (also referred to as “the children of the marriage” or “the children”) with care and control to the Plaintiff. (2) The Defendant shall have following reasonable access to the 2 children: (a) Every Wednesday or Thursday, from 6.30pm to 9pm; (b) Every Saturday, from 9am to 10pm; (c) Every first Sunday of each month, from 4.30pm to 9pm; (d) Half of every school holiday (including overnight access) with the dates and times to be agreed between parties at least 2 days in advance; (e) Alternate public holidays (other than Chinese New Year) beginning with New Year’s Day 2015, from 9am to 9pm; (f) For Chinese New Year: (i) In 2015 and every alternate year, on the eve of Chinese New Year (from 4pm to 9pm) and on the 2nd day of Chinese New Year (from 9am to 9pm); and (ii) In 2016 and every alternate year, on the 1st day of the Chinese New Year (from 9am to 9pm); (g) Liberty to bring the children overseas on holiday, with 2 months’ notice; and (h) Overnight access with the dates and times to be agreed between parties at least 2 clear days in advance.

And The Court Further Orders: (3) The Defendant’s share, interest and title in the matrimonial flat at xxx (“matrimonial flat” or “flat”) shall be transferred (other than by way of sale) to the Plaintiff within 6 months from the date of Final Judgment, in consideration of the Plaintiff paying to the Defendant a sum equivalent to 56% of the net value of the flat (being the open market value of the flat to be determined by an independent private valuer nominated by the Defendant with consent of the Plaintiff and whose consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, less the outstanding housing loan). The valuation costs shall be borne equally between the parties. From the payment received by the Defendant, the Defendant shall refund to his CPF account all CPF monies utilized towards the flat with accrued interest thereon. The costs and expenses of the transfer shall be borne equally between the parties. (4) If the transfer (other than by way of sale) of Defendant’s share, interest and title in the matrimonial flat at xxx (“matrimonial flat” or “flat”) to the Plaintiff did not take place within 6 months from the date of Final Judgment, the Flat shall be sold in the open market and the net proceeds after deducting the outstanding housing loan and costs and expenses of the sale including but not limited to the agent’s commission and stamp fees, shall be divided in the proportion of 44% to the Plaintiff and 56% to the Defendant. From the payments received by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff and Defendant shall refund to their respective CPF accounts all their CPF monies utilized towards the flat with accrued interest thereon. (5) The following matrimonial assets are to be divided in the following manner: (a) The Defendant is to retain the Australian gold coin. (b) The Plaintiff is to retain all the jewellery held in the safe and shall pay $8,715.50 to the Defendant for his 50% share in the jewellery. (c) The 2 watches, namely Rolex Oyster and Omega Constellation, shall be disposed of and the sale proceeds be divided equally. Each party is at liberty to acquire the watches upon paying half the market value of the watches to the other party. (d) The net proceeds of the sale of the car, namely $34,899, now kept by the Defendant, is to be divided in accordance with their respective contributions (41% by the Plaintiff and 59% by the Defendant). Therefore, the Defendant is to pay $14,308.60 to the Plaintiff (e) The exit proceeds from the land banking investment in PS6-xxx and PS6-xxx of $88,539.92, is to be divided between the parties in accordance with their contributions (76.75% to the Defendant and 23.25% to the Plaintiff). Therefore, the Plaintiff is to pay $67,954.39 to the Defendant. (f) The net exit proceeds from the land banking investment in EE8-xxx and EE8-xxx of $1,065.33, is to be divided between the parties in accordance with their contributions (74.79% to the Defendant and 25.21% to the Plaintiff). Therefore, the Plaintiff is to pay $796.76 to the Defendant. (g) The USD 2,000 (or SGD$2,680 at US$1 to S$1.34 rate) of the gross proceeds from the land banking investment in EE8-xxx and EE8-xxx that were used for a reservation deposit for a project in Virginia, USA, which was subsequently cancelled, is to be divided between the parties in accordance with their contributions (74.79% to the Defendant and 25.21% to the Plaintiff). The Plaintiff is to pay $2,004.37 (or 74.79% of the reservation deposit) to the Defendant. (h) As for the land banking investment in CE xxx and CE xxx were acquired with the gross proceeds from the land banking investments in EE8-xxx and EE8-xxx, the Plaintiff is at liberty to retain the 2 land banking investment in CE xxx and CE...