WUA v WUB [2024] SGHCF 10

Outcome: Orders Made

Facts

1          The parties were married for 21 years and have two children, aged 21 and 18. The parties agreed that a portion of the Wife’s unvested stock options can be treated as matrimonial assets, but disagreed on the proportion that should be treated as matrimonial assets. These unvested stock options vest over a period of five years from the award date, and with each passing year, 20% of the stock will vest until all the stock options are fully vested.

Court's Decision:

2          Unvested stock options have been treated as the contractual right to receive options to purchase shares upon the fulfilment of certain condition(s). While their exact value may be hard to determine, the courts have differentiated the existence of an asset from the difficulties of evaluating that asset. Difficulties in valuation or division does not render a contractual right any less an asset.: at [14].

3          However, there are difficulties in valuation and division of such assets because stock options may not have been exercised nor even vest in the Wife. To resolve these difficulties, a division in kind on an “if as and when” basis was granted for the unvested stock options only. Effectively, the unvested stock options will not only be split by their number instead of by their value, but the division will also be postponed until the stock options are exercised.: at [15].

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.