WJM v WJN [2023] SGHCF 18

Outcome: Appeal Dismissed.

Facts

1           Parties were married for 22 years and have one adult child. Husband, a Singaporean by birth, retired in 2000 due to ill health. Wife was a Vietnamese citizen until 2008 when she became a Singapore citizen. Placing equal weightage on direct and indirect contributions, the DJ ordered that the matrimonial assets be divided in the overall ratio of 40.55% (Husband): 59.45% (Wife).

Court’s Decision:

2            Husband may well be right that the Wife, as a non-citizen at the time, would not have been entitled to have the AHG paid to her or at all. As the appellant, the Wife bears the burden of showing that the DJ erred in his reasoning, supported by sufficient proof, and this burden has not been discharged.: at [4].

3            It is not uncommon for one spouse to pay for an item of expense from one account and then receive reimbursement thereafter from the other spouse. Such a practice is not only administratively efficient, but it was, in this case, the only possible way to finance the CPF mortgage as Husband no longer had any monies remaining in his CPF account at the time of the purchase. The DJ’s decision to recognize Husband’s monetary contribution as a CPF contribution, albeit by way of reimbursement, was perfectly reasonable.: at [7].

4            The rental income was legitimately used for Husband’s daily living expenses at that material time. The mutual give and take in a marriage is not rescinded ab initio when the union is severed. Every divorce puts an end to whatever romance is left, but that is understandable. An accounting for every cent in this way transforms the union from a marriage into a business partnership. That, is going too far.: at [8].

The full text of the decision can be found here.

This summary is provided to assist the public to have a better understanding of the Court’s judgment. It is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court. All numbers in bold font and square brackets refer to the corresponding paragraph numbers in the Court’s judgment.