VJP v VJQ

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Cheryl Koh
• Judgment Date: 27 June 2020
• Neutral Citation: [2020] SGFC 62
• Citation: [2020] SGFC 62
• Court: Family Court (Singapore)
• Published date: 07 July 2020
• Docket Number: Divorce Suit No. 3972 of 2018, District Court Appeal No. 28 & 30 of 2020
• Plaintiff Counsel: Mr. Low Hong Quan (M/s Gloria James-Civetta & Co) --
• Defendant Counsel: Ms. Mimi Oh (M/s Ethos Law Corporation) --
• Subject Matter: Family Law,Ancillary Matters,section 112, 113, 124 & 127 of the Women's Charter (Cap. 353)
• Hearing Date: 16 March 2020,18 February 2020

District Judge Cheryl Koh: Introduction

These are the ancillary matters arising out of a divorce involving: (a) the division of matrimonial assets; (b) maintenance of the plaintiff wife (the “Wife”); (c) custody, care and control and access of the two children of the marriage (the “Children”); and (d) maintenance of the Children.

On 16 March 2020, I ordered that: the Wife’s share in parties’ HDB flat (the “HDB flat”) be transferred to the defendant husband (the “Husband”), upon the Husband paying the Wife the sum of $65,000.00; the Husband’s share in parties’ condominium apartment (the “condominium”) shall be transferred to the Wife, with no consideration to the Husband; each party to retain all their own other assets; there shall be no maintenance for the Wife; parties shall have joint custody of the Children, with care and control to the Wife and access to the Husband with supervised exchange at the DSSA; and the Husband shall pay the Wife the sum of $2,000.00 per month as maintenance of the Children, on top of other payments. My full orders are set out in [32] herein.

The Wife has appealed against the whole of my decision. The Husband has appealed against only the part of my decision relating to the division of matrimonial assets.

Background facts

Parties were married on 22 May 2010. In or around July 2014, the Wife moved out of the HDB flat with the Children and moved into her parents’ flat, for her parents to assist her with the Children when she was at work. The Wife filed for divorce in August 2018, and Interim Judgment was granted on an uncontested basis on 13 December 2018. The marriage therefore lasted about 8½ years.

The Husband is 50 years old and working as an in-flight manager with an airline. The Wife is 39 years old and working as an administrative officer in a bank. The Children are two boys aged 8½ and 5½ years old. Since January 2020, the Wife has moved with the Children into parties’ condominium, which is located near the elder child’s primary school.

On 23 January 2019, parties entered into a consent order at the Family Justice Courts’ Child Focused Resolution Centre (CFRC), which provided for the Husband to pay the Wife interim monthly maintenance of $1,500.00 for the Children (without prejudice to both parties’ rights at the ancillaries). It also provided for the Husband to have interim access to the Children with handover of the Children at the void deck of their residence. Subsequently, the Husband filed an application in relation to access of the Children, on the basis that the Wife had denied him access. On 27 May 2019, an order was made for the Husband to have interim access for up to 2 weekdays (5.00PM to 7.00PM) and 1 weekend (11.00AM to 4.00PM) per week, subject to his flight schedule and to be determined at least two weeks in advance. All interim access shall be by way of supervised exchange at the Divorce Support Specialist Agency (DSSA).

Parties do not dispute that the Wife should have care and control of the Children, but disagree on the issues of custody and the Husband’s access. As at the date of the submissions, the Husband had only attended 2 out of the 8 sessions of supervised exchange ordered at the DSSA. Parties had no objections for these sessions to be completed, with an access review fixed thereafter.

The affidavits of assets and means and submissions filed by the parties are as follows: The Husband the Husband’s 1st Affidavit of Assets and Means (“AOM”) filed on 3 May 2019; the Husband’s sister’s Affidavit filed on 3 May 2019; the Husband’s 2nd AOM filed on 18 December 2019; The Husband’s Submissions filed on 14 February 2020; the Husband’s further Submissions filed on 20 February 2020; The Wife the Wife’s 1st AOM filed on 3 May 2019; the Wife’s 2nd AOM filed on 19 December 2019; the Wife’s 3rd AOM filed on 22 January 2020; the Wife’s Submissions filed on 14 February 2020; the Wife’s Further Submissions filed on 19 February 2020.

I shall deal with each of these issues sequentially: division of matrimonial assets; custody, care and control and access of the Children; and maintenance of the Wife and the Children.

Grounds of Decision Issue 1: Division of matrimonial assets

Parties do not dispute that the structured approach in the Court of Appeal’s decision of ANJ v ANK [2015] 4 SLR 1043 applies to the division of matrimonial assets. This entails the following steps: (a) delineating the matrimonial pool; (b) ascribing a ratio for parties’ direct financial contributions and indirect contributions; and (c) deriving each party’s average percentage contributions with any further adjustments.

Value of the matrimonial pool

I find the value of the matrimonial pool to be about $2.3 million, computed as follows:

Assets	The Wife’s position in Fact and Position Sheet (FPS)	The Husband’s position in FPS	The Court’s finding
The Wife’s assets
POSB account	145.97	145.97	145.97 (agreed)
Standard Chartered account	55,773.83	55,773.83	55,773.83 (agreed)
Standard Chartered fixed deposit	135,846.06	135,846.06	135,846.06 (agreed)
Great Eastern accident policy ending with 435	--	0	NIL (agreed)
Great Eastern flexilife policy ending with 552	8,180.15	8,180.15	8,180.15 (agreed)
Great Eastern total health policy	---	0	NIL (agreed)
Great Eastern supreme health policy	---	0	NIL (agreed)
Great Eastern family policy ending with 106	4,950.00	Unknown	4,950.00 (agreed at hearing)
Great Eastern family policy ending with 118	15,240.00	Unknown	15,240.00 (agreed at hearing)
CPF	161,375.08	161,375.08	161,375.08 (agreed)
Subtotal	291,453.91 (361,321.09, less 69,867.18 held on trust for the Children and the Wife’s mother1)	291,453.91	291,453.91 (agreed at hearing)
The Husband’s assets
POSB account	105,863.24	110,857.66	110,857.66 (agreed at hearing)
NTUC starter account	0	0	0 (agreed)
OCBC account	3,098.71	3,099.09	3,099.09 (agreed at hearing)
MayBank account	---	2,205.06	2,205.06 (agreed at hearing)
HL Bank Fixed Deposits	104,300.00	0 These are held in the Husband’s name, but with funds solely from his mother and held on her behalf	104,300.00 The banker’s cheque and cashier’s order produced by the Husband were dated 27 June 2016 and 29 June 2016 when parties were already married, and do not show that the funds came from the Mother2.
UOB Savings (joint account with the Mother)	2,174.39	This is an account opened by the Mother with her own funds, and converted into a joint account with the Husband in 1999, before the marriage in 2010.	1,087.20 The Wife does not dispute that the Husband was added as a joint account holder before marriage. There is also no significant amount in this account.
UOB Fixed Deposit (joint account with the Mother)	186,000.00 The Wife does not dispute that the Husband was added as a joint account holder (in 1999) before marriage (in 2010). She argues that the funds must have originated from the Husband because his mother is illiterate, not working and could not have accumulated such funds.	0 The Husband argued that these represented his mother’s life savings, as his mother had worked and also bought and sold 2 landed properties in Bukit Timah and Pillay Road, before downgrading to her current HDB.	93,000 Whilst the Husband has not produced any documentary evidence evidencing that the funds solely belong to his mother, the Wife is also not able to prove through discovery that the funds solely originate from the Husband.
CPF	288,795.02	288,795.02	288,795.02 (agreed)
AIA	22,956	22,956	22,956 (agreed)
Great Eastern	36,205.50	36,205.50	36,205.50 (agreed)
Shares in Creative	1,950	1,950	1,950 (agreed)
Shares in Singapore Airlines	15,382.40	15,382.40	15,382.40 (agreed)
Shares in SingTel	739.10	739.10	739.10 (agreed)
Shares in XXX	168,000	0	140,000 (based on purchase price of the shares) The share option for the Husband to sell the shares at $168,000 has expired on 15 May 20173.
Subtotal	935,437.36	482,189.93	820,577.03
Joint assets
HDB flat (fully paid up)	540,000.00	530,000.00	535,000.00 (average of the two values)
Condominium Less housing loan	1.35 million (in the Wife’s 2nd AOM paragraph 13) 716,811.19 (2/12/2019) The Wife also sought to deduct an undisbursed loan amount of $176,250.00 which would be disbursed around May 2020.	1.4 million 437,987.98 (29/3/2019) The Husband disagreed to the deduction of the undisbursed loan.	1.375 million 716,811.19 (latest value) Net: 658,188.81 As the value of the matrimonial assets are taken nearest to the date of the ancillary hearing in February 2020, I declined to deduct the undisbursed loan amount.
Subtotal			1,193,188.81
Grand Total			2,305,219.75

Direct contributions to the matrimonial pool

Direction contributions to the HDB flat

I find the ratio of parties’ direct contributions to the HDB flat to be 63.5:36.5 in favour of the Husband, determined as follows:

Contribution	The Wife’s position in Fact and Position Sheet (FPS)	The Husband’s position in FPS	The Court’s finding
CPF	Husband: 167,413.12 Wife: 43,240	Husband: 167,413.12 Wife: 43,240	Husband: 167,413.12 Wife: 43,240 (agreed)
Cash contribution of 250,000	Husband: 125,000 Wife: 125,000	Husband: 170,00 Wife: 80,000	Husband: 125,000 Wife: 125,000
Total	Husband:

...