VAU v VAV

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Tan Shin Yi
• Judgment Date: 12 September 2019
• Neutral Citation: [2019] SGFC 102
• Court: Family Court (Singapore)
• Hearing Date: 11 April 2019,14 May 2019
• Docket Number: Divorce Suit No: FC/D 1022/2018
• Plaintiff Counsel: Ms Jayanthi with Ms Yeo of M/S Lincoln's Law LLC
• Defendant Counsel: Mr Yap Teong Liang of M/S T L Yap Law Chambers LLC
• Subject Matter: Ancillary Matters, Care and Control, Division of Matrimonial Assets, Maintenance
• Published date: 20 September 2019

District Judge Tan Shin Yi: Background Facts

The Plaintiff wife (the “Wife”) and Defendant husband (the “Husband”) were married in February 2011 and they have one son, [S], who was aged 7.5 years when the ancillary matters were heard. The parties’ relationship was extremely acrimonious and this sparked off multiple applications relating to [S]. This case was docketed to me almost from the beginning and I had the benefit of seeing the parties in person and their respective solicitors, and of managing the related applications and issues holistically.

The Wife commenced divorce proceedings on 7 March 2018, based on the ground that the marriage had broken down irretrievably due to the Husband’s unreasonable behaviour. On the same day, the Wife also filed a Summons application for, inter alia, the Husband to return [S] to the matrimonial home and to restrain the Husband from taking [S] out of Singapore pending the conclusion of proceedings (Summons No. xxx/2018). The Interim Judgment was granted on 20 June 2018, based on both parties’ unreasonable behaviour.

It was not disputed that on 5 March 2018, the Husband moved out of the matrimonial home and took [S] with him without the Wife’s consent. [S] started Primary One in January 2018 but after he moved out with the Husband, he did not attend school from 5-8 March 2018. On 8 March 2018, I made the following urgent interim orders for: (a) the Husband to return [S] to the matrimonial home by 3 pm that day and for [S] to continue to attend school; (b) neither party to remove [S] from Singapore without the written consent of the other party; (c) the parties to share care and control of [S]; and (d) the parent whose care and control [S] was in was responsible for ensuring that [S] continued to attend school and for bringing [S] to his tuition and extracurricular activities (the “8 March 2018 Orders”). However, orders (b)-(d) were not complied with and [S] was not returned to the matrimonial home. On 12 March 2018, the Wife commenced committal proceedings against the Husband (the “First Committal Proceedings”).

In the meantime, the parties attended mandatory counselling and mediation at the Child Focused Resolution Centre as directed. On 20 March 2018, both parties consented to the following interim orders: (a) that [S] would attend a play date with a friend on 21 March with the Wife present; (b) that the Husband would simply drop [S] off for the playdate and would not attend the play date; and (c) that the Wife would have supervised access to [S] once a week at the Divorce Support Specialist Agency (“DSSA”) for 8 weeks and a report would be prepared by the DSSA.

On 22 March 2018, the Husband filed a Summons application to set aside the 8 March 2018 Orders (Summons No. 1xxx/2018). This was subsequently withdrawn on 9 July 2018. The Husband also filed an application against the Wife for a Personal Protection Order (“PPO”) for himself and [S], which was withdrawn on 29 June 2018. On 8 June 2019, after hearing the First Committal Proceedings, I found that the Husband was in breach of the 8 March 2018 Orders and ordered him to pay a fine of $2,000 as well as costs of $2,000 to the Wife.

On 12 June 2018, the parties reached a consent order for the Husband to bring [S] to the premises of the Family Justice Courts that afternoon for the access handover, and the Wife would have access to [S] until 23 June 2018. An FJC counsellor also assisted the parties to facilitate the handover. However, on the same day, the Husband went to the matrimonial home at 11.30 pm and brought [S] home. On 18 June 2018, the Wife filed another Summons application seeking interim sole custody, care and control of [S], with supervised access to the Husband, pending the resolution of the ancillary matters (Summons No. 2xxx/2018).

On 20 June, with the assistance of the parties’ solicitors, a consent order was recorded for the Husband to hand over [S] to the Wife at 7 pm that day, and the Wife would have access to [S] until 24 June. However, the Wife only managed to have access to [S] from 21 to 24 June. The Wife then instructed her solicitors to write to the Husband’s solicitors to inform him that she would bring [S] home from school on 27 June, and would exercise her access until 1 July 2018. The Husband did not agree to this.

On 27 June 2018, both parties went to pick [S] up from school and a dispute occurred. Both the school counsellor and the principal had to step in to assist the parties to resolve their dispute. Subsequently, [S] did not attend school again on 28 and 29 June 2018. On 29 June 2018, at a case conference, I ordered that [S] was to be in the care of the Wife from 29 June to 3 July 2018, and that the Husband was to bring [S] to the Wife at 2 pm on 29 June 2018. Subsequently, when [S] returned to the care of the Husband, he did not attend school again on 4 July 2018.

On 9 July 2018, I made interim orders for: (i) the Husband’s parents or helper to hand [S] over to the Wife by 3pm on 9 July; (ii) the Husband not to be present at the handover; and (iii) the Wife to have care of [S] until further orders were made. The parties and [S] were also ordered to attend counselling at the DSSA and to attend the Children-In-Between Programme. As the parties had previously voluntarily attended a co-parenting programme referred by SAFE SPACE Singapore, they were also told to continue attending this programme.

On 13 July 2018, I further ordered that pending the conclusion of the ancillary matters, the Wife was to have interim care and control of [S], with supervised access to the Husband once a week at the DSSA. Fortunately, the parties were subsequently able to reach an agreement for the Husband to have unsupervised access instead and on 3 January 2019, a consent order was recorded for the Husband to have unsupervised access to [S] every Saturday from 10.30 am to 8 pm pending the resolution of the ancillary matters.

The Present Appeal

I have set out the facts above as they are relevant to the final orders I made relating to [S]. I heard the ancillary matters on 11 April 2019 and reserved judgment, pending further submissions regarding specific items of jewellery which the Husband wanted the Wife to return.

On 14 May 2019, I made the following orders, which are now the subject of appeal by the Husband: The Husband and Wife shall have joint custody of [S] with care and control to the Wife. The Husband shall have the following access to [S]: On Tuesdays, from 6 pm to 8.30 pm; Overnight access from Friday after school to 6pm on Saturday; The first half of the June and December school holidays each year, including overseas access; During the March and September school holidays each year, from 9 am on Monday to 6 pm on Wednesday; Alternate public holidays from 6 pm on the eve of the public holiday to 5 pm on the day of the public holiday, commencing from Vesak Day 2019. This shall exclude Deepavali and Christmas; Deepavali access from 6 pm on the eve to 5 pm on Deepavali; On the Husband’s birthday from 4 pm to 8 pm if it falls on a weekday. If his birthday falls on a weekend, access shall be from 8 am to 6 pm. On [S]’s birthday for alternate years commencing 2020; from 3 pm to 8 pm, if it falls on a weekday; and from 9 am to 6 pm if it falls on a weekend. For avoidance of doubt, the Husband’s usual access shall not apply during public holidays, school holidays, Christmas eve and Christmas Day. The Husband shall inform the Wife no less than one week before his June and December school holiday access if he intends to take the child overseas; and shall forward the proposed itinerary, flight and accommodation details and contact numbers to the Wife no less than one week before the proposed trip. The Wife shall hand over the child’s passport to the Husband at the start of his school holiday access and the Husband shall return the child’s passport to the Wife when he returns the child to the Wife after such access. When the Wife is taking the child for overseas holidays during her half of the June and December school holidays, she is to forward the proposed itinerary, flight and accommodation details and contact numbers to the Husband no less than one week before the proposed trip. The Husband is to hand over the child’s passport to the Wife by 19 May 2019. Parties are to attend DSSA counselling. In addition, the parties and the child are to attend the Children-In-Between Programme. There shall be no maintenance for the Wife with no liberty to apply. The Husband shall pay the sum of $900 per month as maintenance for the child, commencing 31 May 2019 and thereafter on the last day of each month. Payment shall be made directly into the Wife’s bank account. The Husband shall retain the matrimonial flat at [Property 1] in his sole name, whereas the Wife shall retain the property at [Property 2] in her sole name. The Husband is to pay the Wife the sum of $19,300, being her share of the matrimonial assets, as follows: $10,000 within 4 weeks from the date of this order; $5,000 within 8 weeks from the date of this order; and $4,300 within 12 weeks from the date of this order. Each party is to retain all other assets in their respective names. The Wife is to return to the Husband the items of jewellery specified in the correspondence from the Wife’s solicitors dated 2 May 2019. Liberty to apply. No order as to costs for the ancillary matters. Penal notice to be inserted.

Custody, care and control of [S]

The parties agreed that they should both have joint custody of [S], but each party sought to have sole care and control. It is trite law that the primary consideration of the Court is the best interest of the child, and all relevant factors would be taken into account. In this particular case, I had the benefit of observing how [S] fared while in each party’s care and control, due to the events...