UYT v UYU: Appeal on Child Maintenance for Overseas University Education

UYT appealed against the order of the District Court to pay 60% of his son UYU's expenditures for his university education in Canada. The High Court (Family Division) allowed the appeal, holding that UYT was not obliged to pay any contribution to UYU's further education in Canada. The court considered the son's age, the consent order made during the parents' divorce, and the father's financial circumstances.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court (Family Division)

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding father's obligation to pay for his adult son's university education in Canada. The court allowed the appeal, finding no obligation.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
UYTAppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon
UYURespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
UXFAppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon
UXGRespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Thirumurthy Ayernaar PambayanMurthy & Co
S MagintharanEssex LCC
Benedict Tan YixunEssex LCC

4. Facts

  1. The respondent was 22 years old when he applied for an order that his father pay for his university education in Canada.
  2. The respondent's parents divorced when he was 8 years old, and the father was ordered to pay no maintenance.
  3. The respondent graduated from Republic Polytechnic with a Diploma in IT Service Management in May 2018.
  4. The respondent wanted to pursue a degree in journalism at the University of Alberta, requiring a two-year preparatory course at Columbia College.
  5. The judge below ordered the appellant to pay 60% of various expenditures for the respondent's education in Canada.
  6. The appellant claims he is now retired and supported by his second family.
  7. The respondent’s mother accepted the consent order about 16 years ago, and had watched it age in tandem with the respondent.

5. Formal Citations

  1. UYTvUYU, District Court of Appeal No 58 of 2019, [2020] SGHCF 8

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Parents divorced
Respondent completed GCE O-Level examinations
Respondent graduated from Republic Polytechnic
Letter from Columbia College regarding preparatory course
Judge ordered appellant to pay 60% of expenditures for education in Canada
Order of court enforcing the order of 27 February 2019
Hearing regarding respondent’s application to enforce the original maintenance order
Appellant has balance of $132,875.75 across his Central Provident Fund accounts
Hearing date
Hearing date
Hearing date
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Obligation to pay for adult child's overseas education
    • Outcome: The court held that the appellant was not obliged to pay any contribution to the respondent’s further education in Canada.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Order for father to pay for university education

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Family Law
  • Child Support

11. Industries

  • Education

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 69(2) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 69(5)(c) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Child maintenance
  • Overseas education
  • Tertiary education
  • Consent order
  • Adult child
  • University education

15.2 Keywords

  • Family Law
  • Child Maintenance
  • Overseas Education
  • University
  • Singapore
  • Appeal

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Family Law95
Child Support80
Maintenance75
Children's Welfare60
Tertiary Education50

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Child Support
  • Education Law