Singapore Court Report: Matrimonial Assets Division in Family Law

This report details a visit to the Singapore High Court, observing the case UGG v UGH (M.W.) [2017] SGHCF 25, an appeal against a District Court's decision regarding matrimonial asset division and wife's maintenance in a divorce case. The appellant, Ms. Lim Poh Choo, argued that the District Judge failed to consider the wife's indirect contributions in raising prematurely born children and wrongly awarded the husband S$4315 for home renovations. Additional appeals were made for extending the sale time of the matrimonial home and covering the elder child's surgery expenses. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that family courts cannot easily overturn lower court decisions unless substantial changes are warranted, extending the sale time to three months, but not ordering surgery expenses without proper documentation. The report also briefly explains the structure of the Singapore judicial system and reflects on the practical court experience, noting the respect for judges, professional conduct of attorneys, and overall well-organized system.

Running head: SINGAPORE COURT VISIT REPORT
Student’s name-
Date/Time of observations- 13th November, 2017, 9 am to 5 pm
Court- Singapore High Court- Family Law- matrimonial assets- division
Case name- UGG v UGH (M.W.) [2017] SGHCF 25
Presiding judge- Foo Tuat Yien JC
Disputes related to the case - 1) The division of matrimonial assets.
2) Determination of maintenance.
3) The grant of custody and access orders regarding the children.

1SINGAPORE COURT VISIT REPORT
For the purpose, I visited the Singapore High Court- Family Law- matrimonial assets-
division (Singapore Family Court) on Monday, 13th November, 2017 from 9 am to 5 pm.
There I observed a case of appeal against the decision of the District judge regarding the
division of matrimonial assets and maintenance of the wife in the context of a case of
divorce. This paper will give details of the case I witnessed in the Singapore high Court-
Family Law- matrimonial assets- division.
The name of the case, which was witnessed by me, was UGG v UGH (M.W.) [2017]
SGHCF 25. The case was an appeal against the decisions of the judge of the District Court
regarding the division and maintenance orders relating to a case of divorce. The counsel for
the wife, Ms Lim Poh Choo, appealed on behalf of her client to the appellate court on the
grounds that the District judge, while giving judgment, failed to take into account the indirect
contributions of the wife by investing time and energy for raising her prematurely born
children and awarded a particular sum of S$4315 to the respondent husband for renovation of
the matrimonial home. Furthermore, the appeal made, was for increasing the wife’s share in
the indirect contributions and for a review of the maintenance awarded, regarding which, no
submissions were made after the review, as to the appropriate sum ought to be awarded. The
appeal was made because the wife felt that the District Court did not provide proper
adjudication and failed to properly determine the cost of division and maintenance.
Furthermore, Ms Lim made additional appeals to the appellate court regarding the time
extension for the sale of the matrimonial home and also for payment of the surgery expenses
of the elder child of the parties, to be paid by the respondent husband.
The case was dismissed by the appellate court. Choo Han Teck J, in this case, stated
that in case of division and maintenance in relation to divorce, there is no clear formula and
these are complicated cases. The personal views of judges vary and it also very difficult to
draw a conclusion with the help of accurate precedents. Most importantly, he stated the

2SINGAPORE COURT VISIT REPORT
principle that though the family courts can review cases afresh, it cannot disturb the findings
and orders of the lower court if such disturbances don’t lead to any substantial changes.
Taking all these factors, the appellate court magistrate did not change the previous orders or
findings and dismissed the case. In respect of the additional appeals made before it, the
appellate court extended the time of sale to 3 months and it did not give any orders regarding
the surgery of one of the children and gave the parties liberty to apply in future, as there was
no proof of the estimated costs of the surgery, expected time of the surgery and whether the
cost was within the insurance amount or not.
The Singapore judicial system is a two tier system, namely the Supreme Court and the
State courts, comprising of the district and the magistrate courts, dealing with both civil and
criminal cases. There are various differences between the district courts and the magistrate
courts. In one hand, judges preside over the District Courts and on the other hand, the
magistrates preside over the Magistrate Courts. A District Court has jurisdiction to hear and
try an action for the recovery of a sum or sums not exceeding S$250,000 in cases of civil
claims and in cases of road traffic accident claims or claims for personal injuries due to
industrial accidents, up to $500,000. Whereas, a Magistrate's Court has jurisdiction to hear
and try an action for the recovery of a sum or sums not exceeding S$60,000 in cases of civil
claim or claims. Moreover a district judge can act as a magistrate in a magistrate court,
whereas, a magistrate cannot act as a judge of the high court.
I had an incredible experience on my first visit to the Singapore High Court- Family
Law- matrimonial assets- division. I have gained some knowledge about the case I witnessed
through the daily list published by the court, as I went through the official website of the
courts the day before my visit. I had taken note of court etiquettes which are to be
maintained by people visiting the court. The Practical court experience was very different
from what is portrayed in movies. In reality the system it is a well organized system and the

3SINGAPORE COURT VISIT REPORT
judges are treated with utmost respect. Everyone stands when the judges or magistrates enter
or leave the court room. People, who came to visit the court, maintained silence and were
properly dressed. The attorneys in the court behaved in a very professional manner. However,
I expected the court room to be a bit bigger in size, but it was not and the furniture inside the
court room was not as clean and shinny, as I expected it to be. In totality, the experience
helped me to gain proper practical knowledge of the court, along with the way in which the
proceedings are carried on.

4SINGAPORE COURT VISIT REPORT
Reference:
UGG v UGH (M.W.) [2017] SGHCF 25
www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/attachments/110693/[2017]%20SGHCF%2025.pdf