District Judge Jinny Tan:
Introduction
Parties were married on 10 November 1999 in Singapore.
The Plaintiff (“Husband”) is 45 years old, and works as the Head of Finance and Risk Architecture in a bank in Singapore.
The Defendant (“Wife”) is 43 years old. In the early years of marriage, she was a teacher. Subsequently, she was a homemaker for many years. At the time parties filed their respective Affidavits of Assets and Means, the Wife was working part time in a gymnastics school.
There are two children to the marriage. The elder is a boy, now about 12 years old and the younger is a girl who is about 8 years old.
On 21 August 2018, the Husband commenced divorce proceedings against the Wife, on the basis that the Wife had behaved in such a way that he could not reasonably be expected to live with her.
The Wife also filed a counterclaim, citing the Husband’s unreasonable behaviour.
Parties were able to come to an agreement in relation to the divorce and some of the ancillary matters. Interim Judgment was granted on 21 March 2019 on the parties’ amended claim and counterclaim respectively.
Parties also agreed that they would have joint custody of their two children, and the care and control of the children would be granted to the Wife.
The issues left to be determined were therefore the access of the children, division of assets, maintenance of Wife and children.
On the day of the hearing of the ancillary matters, parties had also reached an agreement in relation to the access to the children.
Orders made
After hearing the parties’ submissions, and after considering all the evidence before me, I made the following orders (in relation to the division of assets, maintenance of wife and maintenance of the children): Division of Assets In relation to the HDB flat in joint names, if the Wife wishes to keep the flat, then Husband’s share is to be transferred to her within 3 months, with her paying 55% of the net value of the flat. Nett value would mean the gross valuation less the outstanding loan. The transfer expenses is to be paid by the Wife. The Husband will then refund his CPF monies and accrued interest from his share of the transfer proceeds. If she is unable to take over his share in the HDB flat, then she is to inform him within 2 months from the date of the Order, and the property is to be sold in the open market within 8 months from the date of the Order. Sale proceeds will be divided in the proportion of 55% to the Husband and 45% to the Wife, after payment of the outstanding loan and expenses relating to the sale. Parties to refund their own CPF from their share of the sale proceeds. In relation to the property in the United Kingdom, if the Husband wishes to keep it, then the Wife’s share is to be transferred to him within 3 months, with him paying her 45% of the nett value of the flat. Nett value would mean the gross valuation less the outstanding loan. Transfer expenses is to be paid by the Husband. If he is unable to take over her share in the property, then he is to inform her within 2 months from the date of the Order, and the property is to be sold in the open market within 8 months from the date of the Order. Sale proceeds will be divided in the proportion of 55% to the Husband and 45% to the Wife, after payment of the outstanding loan and expenses relating to the sale. The joint bank account is to be closed, with the outstanding balance to be paid out to the parties in the ratio of 55% to the Husband and 45% to the Wife. In addition, the Husband is to pay the sum of $130,000 to the Wife. Each keep their respective assets. Maintenance for Wife The Husband shall pay the Wife the sum of $1,500 per month as maintenance for 1 year from 31 October 2019, then this sum will be reduced to $750 from 31 October 2020 for a year. Maintenance for the children The Husband shall contribute the sum of $3,000 towards the children’s expenses. He is also to bear 100% of the children’s school fees and the school bus. Others All maintenance is to commence on 15 November 2019 and thereafter on the 15th day of each month, and to be paid directly into the Wife’s bank account, except for the school fees and school bus in which the Husband shall make payment directly to the service providers. Each party to bear their own legal costs. Liberty to apply. The Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Family Justice Courts shall execute, sign or endorse any documents in relation to the sale or transfer of the HDB flat or the property in the UK if either party does not do so after having received written notice of seven days.
Appeal
The Husband has now appealed against part of my decision. His appeal is in relation to the following:- the division of the matrimonial assets, especially on the order that the Husband to pay $130,000.00 to the Wife; and the issue of child maintenance, especially on the order that he is to bear 100% of the school fees and 100% of the school bus fees of the children.
I now give my reasons for the decision I made, only in relation to the issues which the Husband is appealing against.
Division of matrimonial assets
Just and equitable division
The Court of Appeal set out the structured approach in ANJ v ANK to work out a just and equitable division of matrimonial assets. This approach (with reference to Twiss, Christopher James Hans v Twiss, Yvonne Prendergast and ANJ v ANK) may be summarised, as follows: express as a ratio the parties’ direct contributions relative to each other, having regard to the amount of financial contribution each party made towards the acquisition or improvement of the matrimonial assets; express as a second ratio the parties’ indirect contributions relative to each other, having regard to both financial and non-financial contributions; and derive the parties’ overall contributions relative to each other by taking an average of the two ratios above (the derived ratio shall be referred to as “the average ratio”), keeping in mind that, depending on the circumstances of each case, the direct and indirect contributions may not be accorded equal weight, and one of the two ratios may be accorded more significance than the other. Adjustments could also be made in respect of other relevant factors under s 112 or 114(1) of the Charter.
The matrimonial pool of assets
Generally, there was no dispute on the pool of assets to be divided, and the only issue raised by both parties at the hearing was whether the Husband had unaccounted monies amounting to $225,510.44.
In the Husband’s Written Submissions, there were no submissions or any arguments made in relation to the exclusion of any asset from the matrimonial pool for division. There were also no submissions or arguments made in relation to any restriction imposed on any of the assets.
Even in the Husband’s Affidavit of Assets and Means, there was no evidence in relation to any of the assets which he claims ought not to be included into the matrimonial pool for division, or any restriction imposed on any of his assets.
In fact, at the hearing, the Court went through a list of matrimonial assets compiled, and asked counsel if there was any dispute in relation to the assets listed.
| |
|
| “Ct: | Husband’s assets – Bank accounts $63,297. Any dispute? |
| DC: | No. Everything is consistent, except no. 5 [Bank account (unaccounted monies)]” |
It was only after the Court made final orders in relation to the ancillary matters that the Husband sought to adduce further arguments on the exclusion of certain assets into the pool. There is no provision in the Family Justice Rules allowing for further arguments to be canvassed after the conclusion of the ancillary matters hearing, and therefore I did not allow a re-hearing of the issue in relation to the assets to be included or excluded from the matrimonial pool when this was never even raised in the ancillary hearing in the first place.
Allegation of monies which the Husband had failed to account for
The Wife claims that the Husband failed to account for the following:- 20 March 2018, $116,000 was withdrawn from his bank account ending 4694; 4 April 2018, $29,510.44 was transferred out from his account ending 0411; and 21 March 2019 $80,000 was transferred out from his account ending 4694.
Although the Wife raised this in her 2ndAffidavit which was filed sometime in end August 2019, the Husband, at no time after that, sought leave to reply to these allegations. Since there was no evidence by the Husband explaining these withdrawals/transfers on affidavit, at the hearing, the Husband’s counsel could only rely on the documents already in the filed affidavits to explain the alleged withdrawals/transfers.
However, based on documents, some of these withdrawals/transfers could be accounted for.
At Page 376 of the Husband’s 2nd Affidavit, it shows that on 17 March 2018 $116,000 was transferred to another account of his ending with 411. There is a corresponding statement from his account ending 411 showing the deposit on 20 March 2018, and this is found at Page 168 of the same affidavit. Therefore, it is clear that the Husband was merely transferring monies from one account to another account.
At Page 169 of the Husband’s 2nd Affidavit, it shows that on 4 April 2018, there was an online transfer of $29,510.44. While the Husband’s counsel explained that the Husband transferred this sum to his UK account to pay for some loan, his mother’s maintenance and mortgage payments, there is no evidence before the court and what Husband’s counsel submitted is evidence from the bar.
At Page 511 of the Husband’s 2nd Affidavit, it shows that on 19 March 2019 $80,000 was transferred to another account of his ending with 411. There is a corresponding statement from his account ending 411 showing the deposit on 21 March 2018, and this is found at Page 180 of the...
