Jaspal Singh v Melville Marie-Anne: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Apportionment under Women's Charter

In Jaspal Singh v Melville Marie-Anne, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the division of matrimonial assets following a divorce. The initial decision by a district judge was appealed by the respondent, Melville Marie-Anne. The High Court, presided over by Justice Kan Ting Chiu, allowed the appeal, ordering a 65:35 division of the matrimonial assets in favor of the petitioner, Jaspal Singh. The court valued the total matrimonial assets at $805,082 and allowed the parties to agree on the specific division of assets, including real properties in Singapore and Australia, club memberships, and shares.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding the division of matrimonial assets. The High Court allowed the appeal, ordering a 65:35 split in favor of the petitioner.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Jaspal SinghPetitioner, RespondentIndividualAppeal allowedWonImran H Khwaja
Melville Marie-AnneRespondent, AppellantIndividualAppeal partially allowedPartialRamalingam Kasi, B Uthayancharan

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Imran H KhwajaTan Rajah & Cheah
Ramalingam KasiRaj Kumar & Rama
B UthayancharanRaj Kumar & Rama

4. Facts

  1. The parties were married in December 1977 and divorced in December 1997.
  2. The petitioner is a Singapore citizen, and the respondent is an Australian citizen.
  3. The matrimonial assets included properties in Singapore and Australia, club memberships, and shares.
  4. The Balmoral Crescent property was the matrimonial home purchased in joint names.
  5. The Thornton property was purchased by the respondent in her name after the marriage broke down.
  6. The Seaham property was a plot of land bought as an investment in joint names.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Jaspal Singh v Melville Marie-Anne, , [2000] SGHC 200

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Parties married in Australia.
Balmoral Crescent property purchased.
Seaham property purchased as an investment.
Thornton property purchased by the respondent.
Parties divorced.
High Court allowed the appeal.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court ordered a 65:35 division of matrimonial assets between the petitioner and the respondent.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Apportionment of assets
      • Contributions to matrimonial assets

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Fair and equitable distribution of all assets

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Divorce
  • Family Law

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women's Charter (Cap 353, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Matrimonial assets
  • Apportionment
  • Division of assets
  • Women's Charter
  • Matrimonial home

15.2 Keywords

  • matrimonial assets
  • division of assets
  • family law
  • divorce
  • singapore
  • women's charter

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets

17. Areas of Law

  • Family Law
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Division of Matrimonial Assets