UFZ v UFY: Child Relocation, Custody, and Care & Control Dispute
In UFZ v UFY, the Family Justice Courts of Singapore heard an appeal by the Father, UFZ, against the District Judge's decision to grant care and control of their three children to the Mother, UFY, and to allow her to relocate with them to the UK. The court, presided over by Justice Debbie Ong, dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the welfare of the children as the paramount consideration. The court considered the reasonable wishes of the Mother, the potential impact on the children's relationship with the Father, and the children's integration into Singapore society, ultimately concluding that relocation was in the children's best interests given the circumstances.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Family Justice Courts of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Family
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore court allows mother to relocate with children to the UK, prioritizing their welfare and access to family support after divorce.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UFZ | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| UFY | Respondent | Individual | Care and Control Granted, Relocation Allowed | Won | Yeo Khee Chye Raymond of Raymond Yeo |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Debbie Ong | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Yap Teong Liang | T L Yap Law Chambers LLC |
| Tan Hui Qing | T L Yap Law Chambers LLC |
| Yeo Khee Chye Raymond | Raymond Yeo |
4. Facts
- The parties married in 2000 and have three children.
- The family has been living in Singapore since 2008.
- The Father is a Singapore citizen, and the Mother is a British citizen and Singapore Permanent Resident.
- The Mother commenced divorce proceedings in 2014.
- The District Judge granted care and control to the Mother and allowed relocation to the UK.
- The children expressed a desire to move to the UK after visiting in 2017.
- The Father has a busy work travel schedule.
5. Formal Citations
- UFZ v UFY, HCF/District Court Appeal No 120 of 2017, [2018] SGHCF 8
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Parties married | |
| Family moved to Singapore | |
| Mother obtained Singapore Permanent Resident status | |
| Father and children became Singapore citizens | |
| Divorce proceedings commenced | |
| Interim Judgment of Divorce granted | |
| Children visited Trelawnyd, UK | |
| District Judge made orders on ancillary matters | |
| Oral submissions heard | |
| Children interviewed | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Relocation of Children
- Outcome: The court allowed the relocation, finding it to be in the welfare of the children.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Impact on relationship with left-behind parent
- Reasonable wishes of primary caregiver
- Uprooting of children from familiar environment
- Care and Control of Children
- Outcome: The court granted care and control to the Mother, recognizing her role as the primary caregiver.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Primary caregiver
- Emotional bond with children
- Parental work schedule
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against care and control order
- Appeal against relocation order
9. Cause of Actions
- Divorce
- Application for Care and Control
- Application for Relocation
10. Practice Areas
- Family Litigation
- Divorce
- Child Custody
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BNS v BNT | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 973 | Singapore | Cited for the legal principles in relocation applications, emphasizing that the welfare of the child is paramount. |
| TAA v TAB | High Court | Yes | [2015] 2 SLR 879 | Singapore | Cited as an example where relocation was not allowed due to concerns about uprooting children from a stable environment and disrupting their relationship with the other parent. |
| TCI v TCJ | District Court | Yes | [2015] SGFC 58 | Singapore | Cited as an example where relocation was allowed because there was a real possibility of settledness and kinship support for the children. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Guardianship of Infants Act (Cap 122, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Relocation
- Care and control
- Welfare of the child
- Primary caregiver
- Access
- Parental responsibility
- Joint parenting
- Kinship support
15.2 Keywords
- Family Justice Courts
- Singapore
- Divorce
- Child Custody
- Relocation
- Care and Control
- Children's Welfare
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Family Law | 95 |
| Relocation Disputes | 90 |
| Care and Control | 90 |
| Child Custody | 85 |
| Access to Children | 70 |
| Maintenance | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Family Law
- Divorce Law
- Child Custody
- Relocation