XBV v XBU: Appeal on Child Custody Handover Time - Best Interests of Children

In XBV v XBU, before the General Division of the High Court (Family Division) of Singapore, the Father appealed against the District Judge's decision regarding the handover time of their two children. The Father sought a change from Sunday evening at 6pm to Sunday morning at 9am. The court dismissed the appeal, finding it procedurally defective and without merit, emphasizing the importance of shared care and the children's best interests.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Family Justice Courts of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding child custody handover time. The court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of shared care and the children's best interests.

1.7 Decision Date

21 January 2025

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
XBV	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Yap Teong Liang of T L Yap Law Chambers LLC Huang Liang Jun Russell of T L Yap Law Chambers LLC
XBU	Respondent	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Won	Chan Qi Ming Eugene of Harry Elias Partnership LLP Gill Carrie Kaur of Harry Elias Partnership LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Tan Siong Thye	Senior Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Yap Teong Liang	T L Yap Law Chambers LLC
Huang Liang Jun Russell	T L Yap Law Chambers LLC
Chan Qi Ming Eugene	Harry Elias Partnership LLP
Gill Carrie Kaur	Harry Elias Partnership LLP

4. Facts

The Father and the Mother were married in May 2011 and have two daughters.
The Mother moved out of the matrimonial home with the Children in June 2022 and commenced divorce proceedings.
In October 2022, interim judgment was granted, and a consent order was made regarding the division of assets and spousal maintenance.
In November 2023, the Judge ordered joint custody and shared care and control, with the Mother having the Children from Thursday after school to Sunday evening, and the Father from Sunday evening to Thursday.
The Father did not appeal the November 2023 order.
In March 2024, the parties disagreed on the handover time on Sunday evening.
In May 2024, the Judge clarified the handover time to be 6pm on Sunday.

5. Formal Citations

XBV v XBU, District Court Appeal No 62 of 2024, [2025] SGHCF 7

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2011-05-01	Marriage of the Father and the Mother
2022-06-01	The Mother and the Children moved out of the matrimonial home
2022-06-01	The Mother commenced divorce proceedings against the Father
2022-10-01	Interim judgment was granted
2023-11-29	The Judge made substantive orders on the Children’s care arrangements as well as their maintenance
2024-03-01	Parties indicated they were unable to agree on the handover time
2024-05-20	The Judge heard the parties on the handover time on Sunday evening
2024-09-30	Appellant’s Case dated
2024-10-30	Respondent’s Case dated
2024-11-20	Hearing date
2025-01-22	Judgment date

7. Legal Issues

Child Custody Handover Time
- Outcome: The court held that the handover time should remain at 6pm on Sunday evening, as it was in the best interests of the children and did not disproportionately favor either parent.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Best interests of the child
  - Shared care and control arrangement
  - Apportionment of time between parents
- Related Cases:
  - [2018] 2 SLR 833
  - [2024] 1 SLR 158
  - [2006] 1 SLR(R) 135
  - [2024] SGHCF 22
  - [2012] 1 SLR 840
  - [2018] 5 SLR 1089
Filing Appeal Within Prescribed Time
- Outcome: The court held that the Father's appeal was procedurally defective as it was an attempt to appeal against an earlier order for which the appeal timeline had expired.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [2004] 2 SLR(R) 505

8. Remedies Sought

Change of child custody handover time from Sunday evening to Sunday morning

9. Cause of Actions

No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

Family Law
Divorce
Child Custody

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
TSF v TSE	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2018] 2 SLR 833	Singapore	Cited to state that an appellate court would be slow to intervene in decisions involving the welfare of children.
AD v AE	N/A	Yes	[2004] 2 SLR(R) 505	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a party must comply with the procedural rules to exercise his or her right of appeal.
WKM v WKN	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2024] 1 SLR 158	Singapore	Cited to reiterate that consideration of the welfare of a child is the “golden thread” running through all proceedings that directly affect the interests of children.
IW v IX	N/A	Yes	[2006] 1 SLR(R) 135	Singapore	Cited to state that what is in the best interests of a child turns on the specific facts of each case.
WXA v WXB	High Court	Yes	[2024] SGHCF 22	Singapore	Cited to explain that shared care and control means that the Children should spend roughly the same amount of time living with both parents.
AQL v AQM	N/A	Yes	[2012] 1 SLR 840	Singapore	Cited to explain that shared care and control means that the Children should spend roughly the same amount of time living with both parents.
TAU v TAT	N/A	Yes	[2018] 5 SLR 1089	Singapore	Cited to accept that it was impractical to mathematically apportion time equally between the parents.
AD v AE (minors: custody, care, control and access)	N/A	Yes	[2005] 2 SLR(R) 180	Singapore	The case was on its facts materially different from the present case.
BLD v BLE	District Court	Yes	[2013] SGDC 333	Singapore	The case was on its facts materially different from the present case.
TDZ v TEA	Family Court	Yes	[2015] SGFC 83	Singapore	The case was on its facts materially different from the present case.
UEV v UEW and UEX	Family Court	Yes	[2017] SGFC 101	Singapore	The case was on its facts materially different from the present case.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Family Justice Rules 2014
Family Justice (General) Rules 2024
r 831(3)–(4) of the FJR 2014
r 825(b) of the FJR 2014

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Women’s Charter 1961	Singapore
s 130 of the WC	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Child custody
Handover time
Shared care and control
Best interests of the child
Procedural defect
Apportionment of time

15.2 Keywords

Child custody
Handover time
Family law
Singapore
Appeal
Best interests of child

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Family Law	95
Care and Control	90
Child Custody	85
Access to Children	75
Litigation	30

16. Subjects

Family Law
Child Custody
Appeals
Civil Procedure