Chan Tin Sun v Fong Quay Sim: Division of Matrimonial Assets after Wife's Arsenic Poisoning
Chan Tin Sun appealed against the High Court's decision to award his former wife, Fong Quay Sim, a 42% share of the matrimonial assets. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, reducing the wife's share to 28%, considering her misconduct of systematically poisoning the husband with arsenic between 2004 and 2005. The court found that the wife's actions warranted a negative value to be ascribed to her contributions to the marriage, impacting the division of assets.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Family
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding division of matrimonial assets. The wife systematically poisoned the husband with arsenic. The court considered the wife's misconduct.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chan Tin Sun | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | N Sreenivasan, Stuart A Palmer |
| Fong Quay Sim | Respondent | Individual | Appeal Partially Allowed | Partial | Wong Chai Kin |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Judith Prakash | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| N Sreenivasan | Straits Law Practice LLC |
| Stuart A Palmer | Straits Law Practice LLC |
| Wong Chai Kin | Wong Chai Kin |
4. Facts
- Husband and Wife were married for 34 years.
- Wife systematically poisoned the Husband with arsenic between 2004 and 2005.
- Wife was convicted under s 328 of the Penal Code and sentenced to one year’s imprisonment.
- Husband filed for divorce on the ground of the Wife’s unreasonable behaviour.
- Wife filed a counterclaim alleging the Husband’s unreasonable behaviour.
- The net value of the matrimonial assets was $2,101,155.53.
- Husband failed to make full and frank disclosure in respect of $704,904.03 withdrawn from his OCBC Easisave Account.
5. Formal Citations
- Chan Tin Sun v Fong Quay Sim, Civil Appeal No 87 of 2014, [2015] SGCA 2
- Chan Tin Sun v Fong Quay Sim, , [2014] 3 SLR 945
- PP v Fong Quay Sim, , [2010] SGDC 189
- PP v Fong Quay Sim, , [2010] SGDC 224
- Fong Quay Sim v PP, , [2011] SGHC 187
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Marriage occurred | |
| Wife started poisoning the Husband | |
| Husband admitted to Changi General Hospital | |
| Wife poisoned the Husband | |
| Husband admitted to Changi General Hospital | |
| Husband diagnosed with chronic arsenic poisoning | |
| Police report filed by Changi General Hospital | |
| Wife sentenced to one year’s imprisonment | |
| Husband filed for divorce | |
| Interim judgment of divorce granted | |
| Hearing of the ancillary matters held in the High Court | |
| Appeal heard and allowed | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Division of Matrimonial Assets
- Outcome: The court allowed the appeal and reduced the wife's share of the matrimonial assets, considering her misconduct.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Valuation of contributions
- Impact of misconduct on division
- Adverse inference for non-disclosure
- Misconduct in Matrimonial Proceedings
- Outcome: The court considered the wife's poisoning of the husband as a significant factor in determining the division of assets.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Impact of criminal conduct
- Negative contribution to marriage
- Adverse Inference for Non-Disclosure of Assets
- Outcome: The court upheld the drawing of an adverse inference against the husband for failing to fully disclose the use of funds withdrawn from his OCBC Easisave Account.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to provide full and frank disclosure
- Unexplained withdrawals from bank accounts
8. Remedies Sought
- Division of Matrimonial Assets
- Divorce
9. Cause of Actions
- Divorce
- Unreasonable Behaviour
10. Practice Areas
- Divorce
- Family Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chan Tin Sun v Fong Quay Sim | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 945 | Singapore | Decision below regarding the division of matrimonial assets, which was appealed against. |
| PP v Fong Quay Sim | District Court | Yes | [2010] SGDC 189 | Singapore | District Court decision on liability for the wife's poisoning of the husband. |
| PP v Fong Quay Sim | District Court | Yes | [2010] SGDC 224 | Singapore | District Court decision on the sentence for the wife's poisoning of the husband. |
| Fong Quay Sim v PP | High Court | Yes | [2011] SGHC 187 | Singapore | High Court decision dismissing the wife's appeal against her conviction and sentence for poisoning the husband. |
| Yeo Chong Lin v Tay Ang Choo Nancy and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 1157 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not interfere with division orders unless the judge erred in law or exercised discretion wrongly. |
| NK v NL | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 743 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of marriage as an equal co-operative partnership and the court's power to divide matrimonial assets. |
| AQS v AQR | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] SGCA 3 | Singapore | Cited regarding the consideration of parties' conduct in relation to the family in the division of matrimonial assets. |
| Lock Yeng Fun v Chua Hock Chye | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 520 | Singapore | Cited for the need to give full credit to both direct and indirect contributions of spouses to the marriage. |
| BCB v BCC | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 324 | Singapore | Cited for the need to give full credit to both direct and indirect contributions of spouses to the marriage. |
| Miller v Miller and McFarlane v McFarlane | House of Lords | Yes | [2006] 2 AC 618 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that English courts should not take into account the conduct of the parties unless it is inequitable for them to disregard it. |
| Wachtel v Wachtel | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1973] Fam 72 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that the English courts are slow to consider the conduct of the parties except in cases where the conduct is both obvious and gross. |
| Hall v Hall | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1984] FLR 631 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that the spouses’ conduct which the English courts will have regard to has been described as conduct having nothing to do with the ordinary run of fighting and quarrelling in an unhappy marriage. |
| W v W (Financial Provision: Lump Sum) | English High Court | Yes | [1976] Fam 107 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that the spouses’ conduct which the English courts will have regard to has been described as conduct which would cause the ordinary mortal to throw up his hands and say, ‘Surely … [that spouse] is not going to get a full award’. |
| Tan Bee Giok v Loh Kum Yong | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR(R) 130 | Singapore | Cited as a Singapore decision that applied Wachtel. |
| White v White | House of Lords | Yes | [2001] 1 AC 596 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that the defining principle that should guide the courts is that of fairness. |
| Bateman v Bateman | English High Court | Yes | [1979] Fam 25 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court took into account the wife’s conduct consisting in violence which culminated in two serious wounding attacks on the husband. |
| Kyte v Kyte | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1988] Fam 145 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court took into account the wife’s conduct in assisting the husband in committing suicide. |
| Evans v Evans | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1989] 1 FLR 351 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court held that the husband would no longer be required to make periodical payments to the wife after she had been convicted of soliciting others to murder him. |
| H v H (Financial Relief: Attempted Murder as Conduct) | English High Court | Yes | [2006] 1 FLR 990 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court took into account the husband’s conduct in carrying out a horrific attack on his wife, stabbing her repeatedly in front of their children. |
| A v A (Financial Provision: Conduct) | English High Court | Yes | [1995] 1 FLR 345 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court took into account the husband’s conduct in assaulting the wife with a knife and thereafter attempting suicide. |
| Clark v Clark | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 2 FLR 498 | United Kingdom | Cited as a case where the court took into account the wife’s conduct in refusing to consummate their marriage and utilising the husband’s funds to redeem the mortgage on her own home as well as purchase numerous other properties. |
| Koh Bee Choo v Choo Chai Huah | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] SGCA 21 | Singapore | Cited for the law on drawing adverse inferences. |
| Tay Sin Tor v Tay Chay Eng | Singapore High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR(R) 385 | Singapore | Cited for the approach to make a finding of the value of the undisclosed assets on the available evidence. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Matrimonial Assets
- Arsenic Poisoning
- Division of Assets
- Adverse Inference
- Misconduct
- Full and Frank Disclosure
- OCBC Easisave Account
15.2 Keywords
- matrimonial assets
- division of assets
- divorce
- arsenic poisoning
- misconduct
- adverse inference
- family law
16. Subjects
- Family Law
- Divorce
- Matrimonial Assets
- Criminal Conduct
17. Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Divorce Law
- Matrimonial Assets
- Criminal Law