VIG v VIH: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Child Custody, and Maintenance Dispute in Divorce

In the divorce case of *VIG v VIH*, the Family Justice Courts of Singapore addressed the division of matrimonial assets, custody, care and control of two children, and maintenance for the wife and children. The court divided the matrimonial assets in a 70:30 ratio in favor of the husband, granted joint custody with care and control to the wife, and ordered the husband to pay SGD 13,040.00 per month for child maintenance. No maintenance was awarded to the wife.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Family Justice Courts of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Orders made for division of matrimonial assets, custody, care and control of children, and child maintenance.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Divorce case involving division of matrimonial assets, child custody, and maintenance. The court divided assets 70:30 in favor of the husband and granted the wife care and control of the children.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tan Puay BoonJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The parties were married on 1 October 2005 and have two daughters, born in 2006 and 2016.
  2. The parties separated in March 2017, and the husband filed for divorce on 9 October 2017.
  3. The husband is a French national and a Singaporean Permanent Resident, and the wife is a Singaporean national.
  4. The husband sold 95% of his company shares in 2017 for US$17m, with a further payout of US$3m for meeting targets.
  5. The wife worked as a lawyer for about a year in France and from 2009 to 2013 in Singapore, but was a homemaker at the time of the ancillary matters hearings.
  6. The husband purchased a property near Tanglin in 2013 in his sole name, and the parties also own a property in France purchased in 2006.
  7. The parties agreed to share COVID-19 losses, with the wife bearing her share of the losses.

5. Formal Citations

  1. VIG v VIH, Divorce (Transferred) No 4694 of 2017, [2020] SGHCF 16

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Parties married in France
Child A born
Wife moved to Singapore with Child A
Husband purchased the Tanglin property
Child B born
Parties separated
Husband filed writ for divorce
Interim Judgment granted
Order of Court made regarding custody, care and control of the Children
Parties confirmed Child A will not be attending School [Y], but School [Z] instead
Court granted an order that both Child [A] and Child [B] are to be enrolled in School [Z] for the coming academic year
Parties confirmed agreement on COVID-19 losses
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court divided the matrimonial assets in a 70:30 ratio in favor of the husband.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Valuation of assets
      • Inclusion of assets in matrimonial pool
      • Apportionment of assets
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 3 SLR(R) 743
      • [2016] 2 SLR 686
      • [2016] 4 SLR 145
      • [2019] SGHCF 4
      • [2017] 1 SLR 609
      • [2015] 4 SLR 1043
      • [2017] 4 SLR 921
      • [2020] SGCA 57
      • [2018] SGCA 78
  2. Custody, Care and Control of Children
    • Outcome: The court granted joint custody to both parents and care and control to the wife, with specific access arrangements for the husband.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Best interests of the child
      • Shared care and control
      • Access rights
    • Related Cases:
      • [2018] SGHCF 11
      • [1987] SLR(R) 725
      • [2005] 3 SLR(R) 690
      • [2012] 1 SLR 840
      • [2018] 5 SLR 1089
  3. Maintenance for Wife and Children
    • Outcome: The court ordered the husband to pay SGD 13,040.00 per month for child maintenance but did not grant maintenance to the wife.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Financial preservation
      • Reasonable needs of the child
      • Standard of living
    • Related Cases:
      • [2012] 2 SLR 506
      • [2018] SGHCF 5
      • [2015] SGHC 17

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets
  2. Custody of Children
  3. Care and Control of Children
  4. Maintenance for Wife
  5. Maintenance for Children

9. Cause of Actions

  • Divorce
  • Division of Matrimonial Assets
  • Child Custody
  • Child Maintenance

10. Practice Areas

  • Divorce Litigation
  • Family Law
  • Ancillary Matters

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
NK v NLCourt of AppealYes[2007] 3 SLR(R) 743SingaporeCited for the two methodologies of dividing matrimonial assets: the global assessment methodology and the classification methodology.
ARY v ARX and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2016] 2 SLR 686SingaporeCited for the starting position for the date of the identification of matrimonial assets is the Interim Judgement date.
TDT v TDS and another appeal and another matterCourt of AppealYes[2016] 4 SLR 145SingaporeCited for the default position that matrimonial assets should be valued at the date of the first ancillary matters hearing.
BUX v BUYHigh Court (Family Division)Yes[2019] SGHCF 4SingaporeCited for the argument that bank and CPF accounts should be valued at the Interim Judgement date because the matrimonial assets are the moneys and not the bank and CPF accounts themselves.
Chan Teck Hock David v Leong Mei ChuanCourt of AppealYes[2002] 1 SLR(R) 76SingaporeCited for the principle that unvested stock options can be treated as matrimonial assets.
AFS v AFUCourt of AppealYes[2011] 3 SLR 275SingaporeCited in relation to the identification of direct and indirect contributions towards the acquisition of shares and moneys which had been funded by the exercise of a previously granted stock option.
TNL v TNKCourt of AppealYes[2017] 1 SLR 609SingaporeCited for how the court should deal with substantial sums expended by one spouse during the period in which divorce proceedings are imminent or after interim judgment but before the ancillaries are concluded.
ANJ v ANKCourt of AppealYes[2015] 4 SLR 1043SingaporeCited for the structured approach to dividing matrimonial assets.
UBM v UBNHigh Court Family DivisionYes[2017] 4 SLR 921SingaporeCited for the definition of Single-Income Marriages and Dual-Income Marriages.
USB v USACourt of AppealYes[2020] SGCA 57SingaporeCited for the principle that for short marriages, the structured approach in ANJ should apply.
BOR v BOS and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2018] SGCA 78SingaporeCited for the observation that in moderately lengthy marriages, the courts have awarded the homemaker about 35% to 40% of the matrimonial assets.
UGG v UGH (m.w.)High Court (Family Division)Yes[2017] SGHCF 25SingaporeCited for the trend towards awarding the non-income earning party about 25% to 35% of the matrimonial pool for marriages of shorter duration.
ABX v ABY and othersCourt of AppealYes[2014] 2 SLR 969SingaporeCited for the trend towards awarding the non-income earning party about 25% to 35% of the matrimonial pool for marriages of shorter duration.
TAU v TATHigh Court (Family Division)Yes[2018] SGHCF 11SingaporeCited for the principle that the paramount consideration for the court in making orders for custody, and care and control, is the child’s welfare.
Tan Siew Kee v Chua Ah BoeyCourt of AppealYes[1987] SLR(R) 725SingaporeCited for the definition of welfare as the general well-being of the child and all aspects of his upbringing, religious, moral as well as physical.
CX v CY (minor: custody and access)Court of AppealYes[2005] 3 SLR(R) 690SingaporeCited for the principle that a sole custody order would be rare and ought to be made only in exceptional circumstances, eg, physical, sexual, or emotional abuse.
AQL v AQMHigh CourtYes[2012] 1 SLR 840SingaporeCited for the definition of a shared care and control order.
TAU v TATHigh Court Family DivisionYes[2018] 5 SLR 1089SingaporeCited for the factors the court has to consider when deciding whether to grant shared care and control.
Foo Ah Yan v Chiam Heng ChowCourt of AppealYes[2012] 2 SLR 506SingaporeCited for the guiding principle behind the grant of maintenance is that of financial preservation.
UEB v UECHigh Court (Family Division)Yes[2018] SGHCF 5SingaporeCited for the principle that the court, in deciding on the appropriate maintenance for children, is not concerned primarily with an accounting exercise.
APE v APFHigh CourtYes[2015] SGHC 17SingaporeCited for the observation that maintenance is ordered in order to meet the reasonable needs of the child and if the child’s lifestyle is overly extravagant, the husband should not be made to bear the costs of it.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women’s CharterSingapore
s 112(1) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 112(10) WCSingapore
s 112(3) WCSingapore
s 112(4) WCSingapore
s 112(5)(d) WCSingapore
s 115(2) WCSingapore
s 112(2)(e) WCSingapore
s 125(2) WCSingapore
s 126(1) WCSingapore
s 126(2)(a) WCSingapore
s 114(1) WCSingapore
s 68 WCSingapore
s 127(2) WCSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Interim Judgment
  • Ancillary Matters
  • Care and Control
  • Joint Custody
  • COVID-19 Losses
  • KPI Shares
  • SPA
  • Single-Income Marriage

15.2 Keywords

  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Child Custody
  • Maintenance
  • Family Law

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Child Custody
  • Maintenance