Yeo Kim chwee v Ng Ai Geok

CourtDistrict Court (Singapore)
JudgeKoh Juat Jong
Judgment Date25 May 2000
Neutral Citation[2000] SGDC 20
Citation[2000] SGDC 20
Published date19 September 2003




1. The parties were married on 24 December 1994. They had no children. The decree nisi to dissolve their marriage was granted on 8 April 1999 based on the petition as well as the cross-petition. The petition cited the unreasonable behaviour of the wife and the cross-petition cited the unreasonable behaviour of the husband. Both were uncontested. The ancillary matters came before me for hearing on 10 November 1999 and the following orders were made:

(a) the matrimonial flat shall be sold in the open market within 6 months and the proceeds of sale, after repayment of the outstanding loan, deduction of all costs and expenses of sale and payment to the wife of the sum of $28,000, shall be divided in the proportion of 75% to the husband and 25% to the wife;

(b) each party shall refund to their CPF accounts all monies withdrawn for the purchase of the flat with accrued interest subject to any approval by the Central Provident Fund Board of any waiver of refund;

(c) the husband shall pay the wife a lump sum maintenance of $5,000;

(d) there shall be no order as to costs; and

(e) either party shall have the liberty to apply.

The wife appealed against the orders made.

2. The parties knew each other in 1991. In 1993, they broke off the relationship. The Respondent suffered an emotional turmoil over the break-up. In April 1994, they started to go out together again. In May 1994, they went to Japan for a holiday together. Soon after the trip, the Petitioner told her that he had to marry another woman as he had had sex with that woman. He asked the Respondent to be his mistress instead. Some time later, the Petitioner told the Respondent he would marry her if she could give him $20,000. She did so and they were married in December 1994.

3. The Petitioner said that they went out together again in April 1994 because the Respondent threatened to commit suicide. He said that the Respondent threatened to commit suicide if he did not marry her. He asked her for $20,000 only to discourage her from marrying him.

4. I found the reason of the Petitioner in demanding the sum of $20,000 ludicrous. Even if it was true, the Petitioner was highly irresponsible to enter into a marriage because of $20,000 and not because he loved her. No doubt, the Respondent was also to be blamed for having acted in such a foolhardy manner.

5. The relationship between the parties deteriorated after marriage. They quarrelled frequently. There were incidents of violence by the husband. The wife said that she left home on several occasions after the quarrels and the husband often locked her out of the flat. In December 1996, the wife moved out after a quarrel over the monthly instalments of the flat and the parties separated for seven months. In July 1997, the wife wanted to come back. The husband allowed her back after making her sign a statement that she had realised her problem and she promised to be a good wife. Matters did not improve. One month thereafter, there was another quarrel and the wife attempted suicide. In January 1998, there were further incidents. During the quarrel and fight, the wife wielded a knife and a pair of scissors. In February, another...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT