W.M.Low & Partners (Advocates & Solicitors, Singapore)

Divorce.com.sg

News

News:

Recent developments- 2008. A Pre-nuptial agreement has been upheld by the Court of Appeal in a recent case. Case involved two foreigners who had entered into a pre-nuptial agreement in their country. They left their country and stayed in Singapore subsequently. The divorce was filed and heard in Singapore. .

Recent developments- 2007. Since October 2007, a spouse (Spore Citizen or PR) may ask the Court for a transfer of the matrimonial flat or property to him or her without the spouse's cPF being refunded in full or in part. The Court also has power at the hearing or in a variation application make the above order and further order transfer of monies in the CPF account from one spouse to another, as part of the division of matrimonial property. .

2006. Changes to Divorce Documents: Amendments on the mode of divorce proceedings to be effective on the second quarter of 2006. For more details, please refer to the family court website.

2005. Since the landmark case of CX v CY [2005] 1 SLR 724, (High Court upon appeal from the the Family Court), the prevailing view is that a joint custody order would better serve the interest of the child than a sole custody order, unless a joint custody order will not work obviously. The said case has been appealed to the Court of Appeal. The High Court decision was affirmed and appeal dismissed.

The learned Judges of Appeal endorsed the concept of joint parenting, and went on to determine whether on the facts therein there were any exceptional circumstances to warrant a sole custody order. The learned Judges held there was none.

We note from the law report that the Counsel for the mother argued inter alia that the father had failed to pay for maintenance, was overseas and the parties had communication breakdown, and consequently a joint custody order is unworkable. It was also stated that the parties are living in different countries. There were also allegations that the husband's lifestyle and conduct had negative influence on the child. Some of the wife's allegations were denied by the husband. The Court dismissed the mother's appeal for sole custody.

It is clear from the case that the fact that the parties are living in two different countries does not matter. Even if the parties have a past history of acrimony due to unreasonable behaviour of the husband will not be the determining factor. The test appears to be what is in the interest of the child. It appears that for cases where the parties both care for the child and are capable of caring for the child, a joint custody order would be appropriate. It appears that much weight was put on the fact that the learned lower Court Judge had the opportunity of seeing both parties and had formed the view that both of them loved the child. That being the case, a joint custody order is appropriate. What remains to be seen is how subsequent cases on custody will be dealt with by the family Court Judges. What are exceptional circumstances that a sole custody order would be more appropriate ? Whether in due course, parties may have a joint care and control order or that access will trend towards liberal rather than the usual reasonable access.

Commencement of Divorce proceedings within 3 years of the marriage: The High Court has in a case in 2005, allowed an appeal from the Family Court, and granted leave to a petitioner who had petitioned for divorce wherein the parties were married for less than 3 years, even though the Petitioner was strictly, could not be said to be suffering from extreme depravity or hardship. His China bride has deserted him, and during the marriage, had been behaving in a cold and diffident manner towards him. The family Court decision was overturned, but at this juncture it remains to be seen whether subsequent cases would interpret the ruling widely or restrict the case to its facts.

This site is managed by W.M Low & Partners, Advocates & Solicitors, Commissioners For Oaths.

copyright 2003 -2006

usage of this site is subject to the terms herein