VMO v VMP: Division of Matrimonial Assets in Divorce Case

In the divorce case of VMO (Husband) v VMP (Wife) before the Family Justice Courts of Singapore, Tan Puay Boon JC addressed the division of matrimonial assets following a 16-year marriage. The court applied the global assessment methodology, identifying and valuing assets as of the Interim Judgment date (February 23, 2018). The court determined the Husband's direct contribution to be 84.06% and the Wife's to be 15.94%, with indirect contributions assessed at 40% for the Husband and 60% for the Wife. Ultimately, the court divided the matrimonial assets with 62% allocated to the Husband and 38% to the Wife.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Family Justice Courts of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Matrimonial assets divided with 62% to the Husband and 38% to the Wife.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore court divides matrimonial assets in divorce case VMO v VMP, focusing on asset identification, valuation, and apportionment after a 16-year marriage.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
VMOPlaintiffIndividualReceived 62% of the matrimonial assetsPartial
VMPDefendantIndividualReceived 38% of the matrimonial assetsPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tan Puay BoonJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Khoo Kiah Min JolynWongPartnership LLP
Chan Yu XinWongPartnership LLP
Sim Bock EngWongPartnership LLP
Shawn Teo Kai JieDrew & Napier LLC
Khoo Boo Teck RandolphDrew & Napier LLC
Liu Chenghan AloysiusDrew & Napier LLC
Tricia HoDrew & Napier LLC

4. Facts

  1. The Husband and Wife were married in Australia on January 26, 2002, and registered on February 4, 2002.
  2. The parties have one son, born in 2010.
  3. The parties began living separately from 2012 onwards, and the Husband filed a writ of divorce on January 13, 2017.
  4. Interim Judgment was granted on February 23, 2018, ending a marriage of 16 years.
  5. The Husband is an Australian citizen and a partner in the Singapore firm of [X] LLP.
  6. The Wife is an Australian citizen and a legally-trained full-time homemaker.
  7. The parties purchased a property in Bukit Timah in 2007, registered in the Wife’s name.

5. Formal Citations

  1. VMO v VMP, Divorce (Transferred) No 146 of 2017, [2020] SGHCF 23

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Marriage solemnised in Australia
Marriage registered
Parties began living separately
Husband moved out of the Bukit Timah Property
Husband filed writ of divorce
Wife surrendered Friends Provident International policy
Interim Judgment granted
Husband disclosed number of Airline Miles
First Ancillary Matters hearing
Ancillary Matters hearing
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court divided the matrimonial assets with 62% allocated to the Husband and 38% to the Wife.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Identification of matrimonial assets
      • Valuation of matrimonial assets
      • Apportionment of matrimonial assets
      • Dissipation of assets
      • Non-disclosure of assets
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 3 SLR(R) 743
      • [2020] SGCA 109
      • [2017] 1 SLR 609
      • [2016] 2 SLR 686
      • [2010] 4 SLR 617
      • [1936] 1 KB 111
      • [2014] 1 SLR 629
      • [2015] SGHCF 8
      • [2020] SGCA 8
      • [2016] 4 SLR 145
      • [2019] SGHCF 4
      • [2019] SGHCF 10
      • [2018] 1 SLR 1015
      • [2002] 1 SLR(R) 76
      • [2016] SGFC 35
      • [2019] 1 SLR 608
      • [2016] SGHC 44
      • [2015] 3 SLR 1043
      • [2015] SGCA 52
      • [2015] 2 SLR 195
      • [2015] 1 SLR 728
      • [2012] 2 SLR 506
      • [2019] 1 SLR 180
  2. Operative Date for Identification of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court determined that the operative date for identification of matrimonial assets was the date of the Interim Judgment (February 23, 2018).
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Date of separation vs. date of interim judgment
    • Related Cases:
      • [2016] 2 SLR 686
      • [2014] 1 SLR 629
      • [2020] SGCA 8
  3. Dissipation of Matrimonial Assets
    • Outcome: The court found that the Wife's surrender of the FPI policy after the writ of divorce was filed resulted in a loss that should be returned to the pool of matrimonial assets. The court also found that the amounts injected into Company [Y] in 2016 by the Wife should be returned to the pool of matrimonial assets.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Expenditure of funds during divorce proceedings
      • Unreasonable expenses
      • Wrongful dissipation
    • Related Cases:
      • [2020] SGCA 109
      • [2017] 1 SLR 609
  4. Adverse Inferences for Non-Disclosure of Assets
    • Outcome: The court did not find sufficient evidence to draw an adverse inference against the Husband for non-disclosure of assets.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to make full and frank disclosure
      • Concealment of assets
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] 1 SLR 608
      • [2016] SGHC 44

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Division of Matrimonial Assets

9. Cause of Actions

  • Divorce

10. Practice Areas

  • Divorce
  • Family Law
  • Asset Division

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
NK v NLCourt of AppealYes[2007] 3 SLR(R) 743SingaporeCited for the methodologies of dividing matrimonial assets: the global assessment methodology and the classification methodology.
UZN v UZMCourt of AppealYes[2020] SGCA 109SingaporeCited for guidance on dissipations, unreasonably incurred expenses, and adverse inferences drawn on the basis of non-disclosure in division of matrimonial assets.
TNL v TNK and another appeal and another matterCourt of AppealYes[2017] 1 SLR 609SingaporeCited for the principle that substantial sums expended by one spouse when divorce proceedings are imminent must be returned to the asset pool.
ARY v ARX and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2016] 2 SLR 686SingaporeCited for the principle that the interim judgment date is the starting point for identifying matrimonial assets, unless the circumstances warrant otherwise.
AJR v AJSUnknownYes[2010] 4 SLR 617SingaporeCited to support the principle that the interim judgment puts a substantial end to the marriage contract.
Fender v St John-MildmayUnknownYes[1936] 1 KB 111England and WalesCited to support the principle that the interim judgment puts an end to the whole content of the marriage contract, leaving only the technical bond.
Oh Choon v Lee Siew LinUnknownYes[2014] 1 SLR 629SingaporeCited for the principle that continued involvement and provision between parties after separation suggests the existence of a continuous relationship.
TEG v TEH and another matterHigh Court Family DivisionYes[2015] SGHCF 8SingaporeCited for the principle that using the interim judgment date enables the court to better account for continuing contributions to the marriage.
TQU v TQTCourt of AppealYes[2020] SGCA 8SingaporeCited for the principle that marriage continues to be a legal union even if the relationship has disintegrated.
TDT v TDS and another appeal and another matterUnknownYes[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 DivisionYes[2019] SGHCF 4SingaporeCited for the principle that the matrimonial assets are the moneys and not the bank and Central Provident Fund accounts themselves.
UTL v UTMHigh Court Family DivisionYes[2019] SGHCF 10SingaporeCited to distinguish the case where the alleged creditor is not a party to the proceedings.
UDA v UDB and anotherUnknownYes[2018] 1 SLR 1015SingaporeCited for the approach to take regarding non-party claims to interests in matrimonial properties.
Chan Teck Hock David v Leong Mei ChuanCourt of AppealYes[2002] 1 SLR(R) 76SingaporeCited for the wide meaning of 'matrimonial asset' and the treatment of stock options as matrimonial assets.
TLY v TLZFamily CourtYes[2016] SGFC 35SingaporeCited as a decision that considered Airline Miles as matrimonial assets to be divided.
BPC v BPB and another appealUnknownYes[2019] 1 SLR 608SingaporeCited for the principle that there must be a substratum of evidence that establishes a prima facie case against the person against whom the inference is to be drawn.
AZZ v BAAHigh CourtYes[2016] SGHC 44SingaporeCited for the principle that there must be a prima facie case of concealment to draw an adverse inference.
ANJ v ANKUnknownYes[2015] 3 SLR 1043SingaporeCited for the structured approach to dividing matrimonial assets.
Twiss, Christopher James Hans v Twiss, Yvonne PrendergastCourt of AppealYes[2015] SGCA 52SingaporeCited to support the Wife's submissions of a ratio of 80:20 in her favour for indirect contributions.
Chan Tin Sun v Fong Quay SimUnknownYes[2015] 2 SLR 195SingaporeCited for the principle that the court is not equipped to scrutinise the conduct of the parties to assign blame.
ANX v ANYHigh CourtYes[2015] 1 SLR 728SingaporeCited by the Husband to support the argument that a further adjustment was needed to account for the money that the Wife had received during the course of the marriage.
Foo Ah Yan v Chiam Heng ChowUnknownYes[2012] 2 SLR 506SingaporeCited for the guiding principle behind the grant of maintenance, which is that of financial preservation.
TIC v TIDUnknownYes[2019] 1 SLR 180SingaporeCited for the principle that the Wife is to reimburse the Husband for any mortgage payments made between the date of this judgment and the date of payment of the required sum to the Husband.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) s 112(1)Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) s 112(10)Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) s 132(1)Singapore
Women’s Charter s 112(2)(b)Singapore
Women’s Charter s 112(2)(g)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Interim Judgment
  • Global Assessment Methodology
  • Dissipation
  • Non-Disclosure
  • Direct Contributions
  • Indirect Contributions
  • Apportionment
  • Financial Preservation

15.2 Keywords

  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Asset Division
  • Family Law
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Matrimonial Assets95
Family Law95
Division of Matrimonial Property90
Child Custody20
Maintenance20
Child Support20
Division10
Evidence10
Contract Law10

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Asset Division