JAF v JAE: Appeal over Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance - Property Law and Women's Charter

In JAF v JAE, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the Wife, JAF, against orders made by the District Judge regarding the division of a property in Poland and the denial of a separate sum for air travel to Poland. The court, presided over by Valerie Thean JC, partially allowed the appeal, ruling that the Poland property was not a matrimonial asset and therefore not subject to division under the Women's Charter. However, the court adjusted the division of the Scotland property, awarding the Wife 25% and the Husband 75%, considering the Husband's pre-marital contribution to the Poland property. The court also upheld the monthly maintenance payment of S$1,500 to the Wife, finding it sufficient to cover her expenses, including travel.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal partially allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Oral Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal concerning the division of a Poland property and maintenance. The court partially allowed the appeal, excluding the Poland property from division but adjusting the division of the Scotland property.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
JAFAppellantIndividualAppeal partially allowedPartialJAF
JAERespondentIndividualAppeal partially allowedPartialJAE

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Valerie TheanJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
JAFIndependent Practitioner
JAEIndependent Practitioner

4. Facts

  1. The Wife and Husband were married on 25 October 2002.
  2. The Poland property was purchased on or around 13 February 2001 in the Wife's sole name.
  3. The Husband contributed £15,000 towards the purchase of the Poland property.
  4. The parties briefly stayed in the Poland property on two occasions.
  5. The Wife gave up her job in May 2001 and moved to Scotland to stay with the Husband in June 2001.
  6. The Husband sold his apartment in Scotland in August 2001 and made two payments of £7,500 each towards the Poland property.
  7. The main matrimonial asset was a property in Scotland acquired during the marriage.

5. Formal Citations

  1. JAF v JAE, , [2015] SGHC 114
  2. JAE v JAF, , [2014] SGDC 373
  3. JBX v JBY, , [2014] SGDC 449

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Poland property purchased
Wife quit her job
Wife moved to Scotland to stay with Husband
Husband's apartment with previous fiancée sold
Husband made payment of £7,500 towards Poland property
Husband made payment of £7,500 towards Poland property
Date of marriage
Judge ordered Husband to pay Wife maintenance of S$1,200 per month from 3 November 2014
Maintenance sum reduced to S$1,200 per month
Supplemental GD released
Parties appeared before the court
Judgment reserved
Wife's monthly maintenance set at S$1,500 per month
Oral judgment released in written form

7. Legal Issues

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court held that the Poland property was not a matrimonial asset under s 112(10)(a)(i) of the Charter because it was not 'ordinarily used or enjoyed' by the parties during the marriage. However, the Husband's pre-marital contribution was considered in the division of the Scotland property.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Definition of matrimonial asset
      • Pre-marital contributions
      • Application of trust principles
  2. Maintenance
    • Outcome: The court found that the monthly maintenance sum of S$1,500 was sufficient to cover the Wife's expenses, including travel, and declined to order a separate sum for air travel to Poland.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Sufficiency of maintenance sum
      • Reimbursement for travel expenses
      • Earning capacity of spouse

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Division of Poland property
  2. Separate sum for return air ticket to Poland
  3. Division of Scotland property

9. Cause of Actions

  • Division of Matrimonial Assets
  • Maintenance

10. Practice Areas

  • Divorce
  • Family Litigation
  • Matrimonial Asset Division

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
ACY v ACZHigh CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 1320SingaporeCited for the principle that pre-marital contributions can be considered in the division of matrimonial assets.
Lock Yeng Fun v Chua Hock ChyeCourt of AppealYes[2007] 3 SLR(R) 520SingaporeCited for the principle that s 112 of the Charter treats all matrimonial assets as community property to be divided in accordance with the principles set out in the section.
NK v NLCourt of AppealYes[2007] 3 SLR(R) 743SingaporeCited for the principle that the division of matrimonial assets must be a broad brush one, with mutual respect for each spouse’s economic and homemaking contributions.
Smith Brian Walker v Foo Moo ChyeDistrict CourtYes[2009] SGDC 256SingaporeCited for the principle that pre-marital contributions can be considered as contributions towards the marriage.
Michelle Hong Chi Fung (m.w.) v Lin Cheow Sye and anotherHigh CourtYes[1995] SGHC 267SingaporeCited for the principle that maintenance includes a share in the cost of air tickets.
ACU v ACRHigh CourtYes[2011] 1 SLR 1235SingaporeCited regarding the requirements for adducing new evidence on appeal.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Matrimonial asset
  • Pre-marital contribution
  • Maintenance
  • Resulting trust
  • Constructive trust
  • Scotland property
  • Poland property
  • Section 112 of the Women's Charter

15.2 Keywords

  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Property Division
  • Maintenance
  • Singapore
  • Family Law

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Trusts

17. Areas of Law

  • Family Law
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Property Law
  • Trust Law