QU v QV: Contempt of Court for Failure to Comply with Ancillary Order in Divorce Proceedings

In QU v QV, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the wife against a District Judge's decision finding her in contempt of court. The contempt charge stemmed from her failure to comply with an ancillary order of court regarding the custody, care, and control of her child, as well as the surrender of the child's passport and birth certificate to the husband. The High Court dismissed the wife's appeal, affirming the District Judge's decision and ordering the wife to pay costs.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court upheld a finding of contempt against the wife for deliberately failing to comply with an ancillary order regarding child custody and document surrender.

1.7 Decision Date

29 August 2007

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
QU	Appellant, Respondent	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Koh Tien Hua of Harry Elias Partnership
QV	Respondent, Petitioner	Individual	Judgment for Respondent	Won	Yap Teong Liang of T L Yap & Associates

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Tay Yong Kwang	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Koh Tien Hua	Harry Elias Partnership
Yap Teong Liang	T L Yap & Associates

4. Facts

The husband and wife were parties in divorce proceedings.
The husband was granted sole custody, care and control of the child of the marriage.
The wife was ordered to surrender the child’s passport and birth certificate to the husband.
The wife failed to hand over custody of the child and surrender his passport and birth certificate.
The husband applied for leave to proceed against the wife for contempt of court.
The District Judge found the wife guilty of contempt of court.
The wife appealed to the High Court against the District Judge’s decision.

5. Formal Citations

QU v QV, DA 23/2006, [2007] SGHC 140

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1998-07-10	Parties married
2004-03-29	Divorce Petition filed
2004-07-13	Decree Nisi granted
2005-01-24	Ancillary order made
2005-04-19	Decree Nisi made Absolute
2005-06-22	Husband filed OSF No. 98 of 2005
2005-08-22	Interim orders made regarding access
2005-09-02	Wife filed SIC No. 14083 of 2005
2006-01-23	DJ Carol Ling started hearing SIC No. 14083 of 2005
2006-03-07	SIC No. 14083 of 2005 dismissed
2006-03-08	Husband took over custody, care and control of the child
2006-03-09	Wife filed Summons No. 3432 of 2006
2006-03-10	Wife appealed against DJ Carol Ling’s decision
2006-03-16	Wife filed Summons No. 3814 of 2006
2006-03-21	Stay granted to the wife
2006-04-26	Appeal dismissed
2006-04-28	Husband filed Summons No. 6060 of 2006 for leave to apply for a committal order
2006-05-02	Husband filed Summons No. 6204 of 2006
2006-05-10	OSF No. 98 of 2005 was heard. Summons No. 3432 of 2006 was dismissed
2007-08-30	Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

Contempt of Court
- Outcome: The court found the wife in contempt of court for deliberately refusing to comply with the ancillary order.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Failure to comply with court order
  - Deliberate breach of court order
  - Reasonable time for compliance
Time frame for compliance with court order
- Outcome: The court held that even if a court order does not specify a time frame for compliance, a reasonable time is implied, and contempt proceedings can be taken if compliance is not achieved within that time.
- Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

Order of Committal
Fine
Costs

9. Cause of Actions

Contempt of Court

10. Practice Areas

Family Litigation

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
OCM Opportunities Fund II, LP and others v Burhan Uray (alias Wong Ming Kiong) and others (No. 2)	High Court	Yes	[2005] 3 SLR 60	Singapore	Cited for the principle that what is required to establish contempt is a deliberate act breaching an order of court and that the standard of proof in such proceedings was proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd v Karaha Bodas	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR 518	Singapore	Cited for the purpose and principles of contempt of court proceedings.
You Xin v PP	High Court	Yes	[2007] SGHC 120	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the law of contempt is based upon the broadest of principles, namely that the courts cannot and will not permit interference with the due administration of justice.
Attorney-General v Newspaper Publishing Plc	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1988] Ch 333	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that the law of contempt is based upon the broadest of principles, namely that the courts cannot and will not permit interference with the due administration of justice.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Order 45 r 5 Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2004 Rev Ed)
O 52 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2004 Rev Ed)
O 52 r 5(3) of the Rules of Court
O 42 r 6(1) of the Rules of Court
O 42 r 6(2) of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Section 52 Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Section 8 of the Subordinate Courts Act (Cap 321, 2007 Revised Edition)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Contempt of court
Ancillary order
Custody
Access
Reasonable time
Compliance
Statement of Facts
Penal Notice

15.2 Keywords

contempt of court
family law
ancillary order
child custody
Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Contempt of Court	95
Family Law	80
Civil Practice	75
Divorce	70
Child Custody	65

16. Subjects

Family Law
Civil Procedure
Contempt of Court