Re G: Guardianship of Infant - Custody Dispute Between Parents

In the case of Re G, before the High Court of Singapore on 2003-10-29, the appellant, E, appealed against the District Judge's decision to grant his wife, O, sole custody of their son, K. E sought a joint custody order. The High Court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the District Judge's order and making no order as to custody, while O retained care and control of K.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed in part.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding custody of a child. The court set aside the District Judge's order for sole custody, making no order as to custody.

1.7 Decision Date

28 October 2003

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
E	Appellant	Individual	Appeal allowed in part	Partial	S Magintharan of Netto Tan and S Magin
Ms O	Respondent	Individual	Care and control of K granted to Ms O	Neutral	Christopher Gill of Chris Gill and Co

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Tan Lee Meng	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
S Magintharan	Netto Tan and S Magin
Christopher Gill	Chris Gill and Co

4. Facts

E and O were married on 3 November 1997.
Their only child, K, was born on 19 January 2002.
O left the matrimonial home with K on 12 November 2002.
E filed an originating summons for joint custody of K on 10 December 2002.
The District Judge granted O sole custody of K.
E appealed against the District Judge’s decision to grant O sole custody of K.

5. Formal Citations

Re G (guardianship of an infant), OS 650238/2002, RAS 720030/2003, [2003] SGHC 265

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1997-11-03	E and O were married.
2002-01-19	K was born.
2002-11-12	O left the matrimonial home with K.
2002-12-10	E filed an originating summons for joint custody of K.
2003-10-29	High Court set aside the District Judge’s order granting sole custody of K to O and made no order in relation to custody.

7. Legal Issues

Custody
- Outcome: The court set aside the District Judge's order granting sole custody and made no order as to custody.
- Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

Joint Custody Order

9. Cause of Actions

Custody Dispute

10. Practice Areas

Family Law
Child Custody

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Jussa v Jussa	N/A	Yes	[1972] 1 WLR 881	N/A	Cited for the principle that a joint order for custody with care and control to one parent only should only be made where there is a reasonable prospect that the parties will co-operate.
Ho Quee Neo Helen v Lim Pui Heng	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1972-74] SLR 249	Singapore	Accepted that a joint custody order was inappropriate where the parents’ relationship is acrimonious.
Re Aliya Aziz Tayabali	N/A	Yes	[2000] 1 SLR 754	Singapore	Cited as an instance where the court declined to make an order for custody.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Guardianship of Infants Act (Cap 122)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Custody
Care and Control
Joint Custody
Sole Custody
Guardianship of Infants Act

15.2 Keywords

custody
infant
guardianship
family law
Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Child Custody	95
Care and Control	90
Family Law	80
Children's Welfare	70
Access to Children	60

16. Subjects

Family Law
Child Custody