Divorce Grounds: Unreasonable Behaviour

This assignment examines a divorce case where the husband (H) seeks grounds based on his wife's (W) 'unreasonable behavior'. The case highlights W's changing lifestyle, her refusal to participate in H's cultural practices, and her actions like changing locks and neglecting household duties. The assignment delves into legal arguments for both parties, referencing Singapore's Women's Charter and relevant case law like *Wong Siew Boey v Lee Boon Fatt*. Students are required to analyze the facts and determine if W's conduct constitutes 'unreasonable behavior', making a conclusion on H's eligibility for divorce under Section 95(3)(b).

Running head: FAMILY LAW
Family Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1FAMILY LAW
Table of Contents
Question 1........................................................................................................................................2
Issue.............................................................................................................................................2
Rule/Law......................................................................................................................................2
Application..................................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................6
Question 2........................................................................................................................................6
Issue.............................................................................................................................................6
Rule/Law......................................................................................................................................6
Application..................................................................................................................................7
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................8
Reference List..................................................................................................................................9

2FAMILY LAW
Question 1
Issue
Whether the divorce would have an impact on X’s financial position and her right to inheritance
after X’s death
Rule/Law
In the legal parlance, the term ‘divorce’ refers to the statutory procedure signifying
termination of marital relationship. The first and foremost ground for termination of marriage is
that the marriage has been permanently broken down and under no circumstances; the parties to
the marriage can live together as spouses.
The Family Justice Courts has jurisdiction to deal with civil matters such as marriages
and the Women’s Charter governs the laws related to dissolution of marriages in Singapore.
There are certain grounds based on which a person may file a divorce application and such
grounds merely establish the fact that the marriage has been irretrievably broken down.
However, there are certain per-conditions for divorce as well which are as enumerated as below:
a) Married for at least 3 years- it is mandatory to be married for minimum 3 years before
filing a divorce application. According to section 94 of the Women’s Charter, unless the
person filing the divorce petition has been married for 3 years. nevertheless, in particular
cases, a divorce may be filed before the completion of 3 years of marriage provided the
person filing the petition establishes that he/she has suffered exceptional hardship or
his/her spouse has been extraordinarily cruel and unreasonable.

3FAMILY LAW
b) Domicile- the applicant or his/her spouse must be a permanent citizen of Singapore or
treat the country as his/her permanent abode. The applicant must have been residing in
the country for 3 years immediately before the commencement of the divorce
proceedings.
The grounds for divorce are as follows:
1) Unreasonable Behavior- the applicant must establish that his/her spouse has behaved in a
way that makes it is reasonably impossible for the applicant to live together.
2) Adultery- the applicant must establish that his/her spouse has committed adultery and it is
intolerable for the applicant to reside with him/her.
3) Separation- the applicant must establish that his/her spouse has been separated from
him/her for 3 years or a period of 4 years and they are living apart from each other.
4) Desertion- the applicant must establish that his/her spouse has deserted him/her for at
least 2 years immediately prior to the commencement of the divorce proceedings.
The ground based on which Y wishes to file a divorce application is the ground of separation.
In Singapore, the applicants may establish the claim of separation wither informally without any
written document or through a separation agreement and lastly, through a judicial separation
judgment. In Singapore, a marriage can be proved to be irretrievably broken either on fault or a
no fault basis on part of either or both the spouses. In the event a divorce petition is filed on no-
fault basis, the applicant must establish the following grounds as stipulated under section 95(3)
(d) and (e) of the Women’s Charter:

4FAMILY LAW
 The applicant and his/her spouse has been living apart for a period of 3 years
continuously prior to the filing of the divorce proceeding and under such circumstance
the consent of the spouse is essential to obtain a grant of divorce judgment;
 The applicant must establish that the applicant and spouse have been residing apart for 4
years continuously prior to the commencement of the divorce proceedings. In this case,
the consent of the spouse is the not essential to obtain a divorce judgment.
According to section 112(10) of the Women’s Charter, matrimonial assets include the
following assets:
 any assets that has been acquired by one or both the parties in marriage or assets received
by one or both the parties to marriage that has been substantially improved during the
marriage by both or either party to the marriage (Quah, 2015).
 it excludes assets received as gifts or inheritance acquired by either or both the parties to
the marriage and assets that have not been improved after the marriage by either party or
both the parties to the marriage. It also does not any asset that is not a matrimonial home.
In ANJ v ANK [2014] SGHC 189 (‘the GD) 2 CA 102/2014, the court set out an approach to
determine a fair and equitable proportion of assets to be provided to the parties after the divorce.
According to section 112 (1) of Women’s Charter, firstly, the court shall assign a preliminary
ratio to the parties based on the direct financial contributions of the parties to the matrimonial
assets and secondly it shall assign another ratio depending on the indirect contributions to the
well-being of the family. An average of the basis of proportions shall be decided by the court
using the two percentage ratios. However, the court may tilt the average ratio in favor of either

5FAMILY LAW
party depending on factors like length and size of the marriage, matrimonial assets and the nature
and extent of indirect contributions made by either party.
Application
On the facts here, the parties to the marriage, X and Y have been married for 7 years. Due
to Y’s hobby of keeping of reptiles, Y had a snake. X wanted Y to get rid of the snake but he
kept it to a spare room. However, Y left the matrimonial home and both the parties were not in
contact with each other. Even when Y heard of X being a mental hospital suffering from insane
delusions about snakes, X refused to return home with Y after she was discharged.
The parties were living apart for six and a half years and X wanted to divorce Y. As per
the divorce law in Singapore, Y may successfully file a divorce petition as the pre-conditions of
divorce are fulfilled. X and Y have been married for more than 3 years and they treat Singapore
as their permanent abode. Y must establish that he and his spouse have been living separately for
six and half years, which satisfies the condition that they have been living apart for an incessant
period of more than 4 years.
Under such circumstances, it is not necessary for X to give her consent and Y may be
granted a divorce judgment. As per the facts, X opposes the divorce but shall not be successful as
her consent is not necessary or mandatory. In regards to her financial position after the divorce,
the court shall divide the matrimonial assets fairly and in equitable proportion between both the
parties to the marriage under section 112(1) of the Women’s Charter. The court shall also take
into consider the length of the marriage, age of the parties, any disability of the party, the size of
the matrimonial assets and the direct and indirect financial contribution made by either or both
the parties in the marriage. Based on these factors, the court may tilt the balance of proportion

6FAMILY LAW
towards either party, which in this case, points towards X owing to her mental disability that
resulted from the snake kept by Y.
In regards to the right of inheritance after the divorce, X shall be entitled to matrimonial
assets, which includes assets that have been acquired prior to marriage by one or both parties or
have been improved substantially during the marriage by the either or both X and Y. The assets
may also include assets that have been used either of transportation, shelter, education,
household, recreational purposes.
Conclusion
Y may obtain divorce on the ground of separation and X shall be entitled to a fair
proportion of matrimonial assets after the completion of the divorce proceedings.
Question 2
Issue
Whether H can obtain a divorce under Women’s Charter 2009
Rule/Law
In Singapore, divorce may be obtained is either spouse establishes that the two spouses
cannot be expected to continue to reside with each other and that the marriage has been
irretrievably broken down. According to section 95 (3)(b) of the Women’s Charter states that
the aggrieved spouse may show that the other spouse has behaved in a manner which makes it
unreasonable for the aggrieved spouse to live together (Chan Lai Cheng & Pfeifer, 2015).
The ground of ‘unreasonable behavior’ includes any conduct, active or passive, or
omission of any conduct on part of the other spouse (Emery, 2013). In order to establish that it

7FAMILY LAW
cannot be reasonably expected from the aggrieved spouse to live with the other spouse, the court
shall have regards to the character, attitude and the demeanor of both the spouses throughout the
marriage. In Wong Siew Boey v Lee Boon Fatt, the court held that it is insufficient to state that
the parties to the marriage do not have anything in common and they are incompatible.
The court shall test the unreasonable behavior alleged against the other spouse to
determine whether it is reasonably expected from the aggrieved spouse to live together with the
other spouse as was established in Castello Anna Paula Costa Fusillier v Lobo Carlos Manuel
Rosado. The court shall consider the behavior, conduct of both the spouses, and determine
whether such conduct or omissions would affect the marriage to the extent that it cannot be
reasonably expected for the aggrieved person to live with the other spouse. The court shall also
have regards to the overall impact of such behavior for a long period. In Wong Siew’s case, the
court ruled that a series of acts or omissions should be such that if taken over a considerable
time, the acts or omissions shall be perceived to be unreasonable for the aggrieved person to live
with the other spouse.
Application
On the facts here, H and W were married for 30 years and H was always involved in
Black magic. H and W have become alienated from each other for years, in particular, after their
daughter left home. W joined some adult education classes and have been engaged in radical
politics and women’s rights. H often felt embarrassed when his friends taunted about his wife
going out of his control. On the other hand, W refused to socialize with H, refusing to attend
Black magic dinner and dance.

8FAMILY LAW
W’s acts included her changing of door locks disabling H to enter the conjugal home and
kept him waiting for two hours before giving the keys to him. Further, W felt reluctant to cook
and clean for him. These conduct led H wish to apply for divorce and the ground based on which
H may apply for divorce is unreasonable behavior under section 95 (3) (b) of the Women’s
Charter.
The Court shall determine the conduct of W and H while deciding whether it is
unreasonable to expect from H to love with W. As discussed above in the Wong Siew’s case, the
acts or conduct of the other spouse must be such that when all the acts or conducts are taken into
consideration together over a significant time, it would establish that the behavior of the other
spouse is such that it cannot be expected from H to reside with her.
She change the door locks of the matrimonial home and did not let H enter the house for
two hours in response to H’s statement ‘get out or shape up’. Further, when, H moved into the
house she refused to clean or clean for him, thus, not performing any of the conjugal rights that is
otherwise performed by wives. Furthermore, she refuses to socialize with H, as she does not
believe in black magic that H is involved in. W claims that she is no longer H’s slave and shall
not cook or clean or perform her conjugal responsibilities. On the contrary, despite being
embarrassed of his wife’s involvement in radical politics, H has not conducted in a manner as W.
These acts rather failure to act properly are sufficient for H to establish that it is not
possible for him to live with W. Further, as per the test to determine unreasonable behavior, the
court shall take into consideration all the actions and omission of W and H to decide whether it is
reasonable to expect H to reside with W.

9FAMILY LAW
Conclusion
H is entitled to obtain divorce under section 95(3) (b) of the Women’s Charter.

10FAMILY LAW
Reference List
ANJ v ANK [2014] SGHC 189 (‘the GD) 2 CA 102/2014
Castello Anna Paula Costa Fusillier v Lobo Carlos Manuel Rosado [1978]
Chan Lai Cheng, J., & Pfeifer, J. E. (2015). Postdivorce Adjustment in Singapore: Factors,
Themes, and Positive Growth. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 56(6), 429-450.
Emery, R. E. (Ed.). (2013). Cultural sociology of divorce: An encyclopedia. Sage Publications.
Ong, D. S. (2015). Divorce, the family court and family lawyering. Routledge Handbook of
Families in Asia, 411.
Quah, S. E. L. (2015). Introduction. In Perspectives on Marital Dissolution (pp. 1-14). Springer
Singapore.
Women’s Charter2009
Wong Siew Boey v Lee Boon Fatt [1994] 2 SLR 115