UBM v UBN [2017] SGHCF 13

Outcome: Assets divided in the ratio of 60:40 in favour of the Husband

Facts

1 The parties in this case were married for 37 years. The Wife was a homemaker. One of the issues before the Court was how the matrimonial assets were to be divided.

Court’s Decision:

2 The Family Division of the High Court divided the assets in the ratio of 60:40 in favour of the Husband.

3 The Court of Appeal in TNL v TNK [2017] 1 SLR 609 (“TNL v TNK”) excluded the application of the structured approach (set out in ANJ v ANK [2015] 4 SLR 1043 (“ANJ v ANK”)) to long “Single-Income Marriages”: at [39].

4 The words “Single-Income Marriage” ought to be interpreted sensibly in the spirit in which TNL v TNK was decided. It would include a marriage where one party is primarily the breadwinner and the other is primarily the homemaker: at [49] and [50].

5 Parties embroiled in matrimonial disputes should not extend their battlefield in litigation by nit-picking on whether their case should be classified as a Dual-Income Marriage, to which the structured approach in ANJ v ANK applies, or a Single-Income Marriage, to which it does not. The power to divide must be exercised in broad strokes; the broad brush approach has been affirmed many times over by the Court of Appeal: at [54].

The full text of the decision can be found here.