Family Law Archives | Leading Divorce Lawyers Singapore

Tag Archive for: Family Law

Divorce by Mutual Agreement in Singapore From 1 July 2024

Divorce by Mutual Agreement in Singapore

From July 1, married couples can cite divorce by mutual agreement as a reason for divorce if they agree that their marriage has broken down irretrievably.

This change to the Women’s Charter will allow couples to divorce without blaming each other.

Previously, the existing grounds for divorce are adultery, desertion, unreasonable behaviour, and separation for three years with consent and four years without consent. Now, parties can also file for divorce on the ground that they both mutually agree without assigning blame.

To apply for Divorce by Mutual Agreement, parties must provide the court with reasons to conclude that their marriage has irretrievably broken down, and show that they have made efforts to reconcile.

Ultimately, the court must be satisfied that granting a divorce is just and reasonable, considering all circumstances.

Why is divorce by mutual agreement being introduced?

The goal is to lessen conflict and prevent children from being embroiled in tension or arguments when parents throw accusations at each another. It also intends to preserve the mental health of the parties whilst they are going through the divorce.

The benefit of divorce by mutual agreement

A benefit of divorce by mutual agreement is there is no need for the parties to live separately, such as in a divorce by separation with consent. This offers “therapeutic justice” to the family justice system, less disruption to the children, and does not go against parties should they still live together.

How divorce by mutual agreement can make the process better for everyone

The children will benefit. They won’t hear or read about their parents blaming each other for their divorce. It is not uncommon for some people’s mental health issues to be caused by childhood trauma, stemming from how their parents behaved in from of them.

As previously discussed, a divorce by mutual agreement does not require parties to live separately. This allows children to have more regular contact with their parents. It provides the parents more time to source alternative accommodation and get their finances in order. This also saves being compelled to make rash decisions for fear of delaying the process.

The divorce petition will take considerably less time, expense, and effort to produce than the other grounds for divorce. This is because there is less finger pointing regarding the unreasonable behaviour of one party. The smoother the process, the less stressful the divorce will be. Arguing over who is in the wrong and who is in the right will only cause further acrimony.

Stepping away from blame may also preserve the parent’s inclination from tainting their children’s view of the other parent. Not only would stepping away from blame prevent stress, but it also would prevent disagreements to the terms suggested by either party.

The grounds which constitute ‘blame’ can upset the other party as they would naturally become defensive. The accused party could then dispute the divorce, either slowing down or, in the worst cases, denying the divorce altogether. If this happens, and the opposing party rejects accusations of unreasonable behaviour, a judge may decline to break the marriage.

So, although divorce by mutual agreement is more amicable and offers a smoother resolution, it does not necessarily mean the divorce will be without contention, emotion, or resistance.

How long will it take to be granted a divorce?

It remains that to be eligible to file for a divorce; the couple must be married for at least three years. This is applicable in all cases, no matter the grounds relied upon.

Once all terms are agreed upon, there is a three-month reflection period before the divorce is finalised. This reflection period allows both parties to decide whether the divorce is indeed what they want.

The timescale of the divorce process largely depends on whether the divorce is contested or uncontested. A divorce is contested when parties cannot agree to all terms and issues amicably. Therefore, a court’s involvement is required, as a judge will decide on the matters the parties cannot agree on. A contested divorce can take up to a year or more from start to finish.

An uncontested divorce is a divorce where both parties agree to the divorce, and all ancillary matters of the divorce are agreed upon mutually. An uncontested divorce can be concluded from start to finish in four months. An uncontested divorce is often the less stressful and cheaper route rather than a contested divorce.

Although you may pursue a divorce by mutual agreement, it does not necessarily mean the divorce will be uncontested. The divorce may become contested due to a disagreement on how child arrangements should be made or how the finances should be split. Should the divorce become contested, you would need a judge to make the final decision on the matters on which each party disagrees.

Why you should still use a divorce lawyer in a divorce by mutual agreement

There are two sides to decision-making. There is the emotional side and the logical side. These are two distinct aspects which often do not work harmoniously together.

What do we mean by this?

When you make decisions based on emotion, it is because of a feeling or a want. It is typically a natural response to a situation which is important to you, whether it upsets you or makes you happy.

Take, for example, smoking cigarettes. Logically, you know you shouldn’t smoke because it harms your health. However, because of your emotional state, a craving, or a stressful situation, you may still choose to smoke.

It is the same with approaching a divorce. Emotion and logic do not necessarily coincide, which results in parties pursuing or agreeing to terms out of emotion rather than logic. This can cause a person to agree to unfavourable terms. It can also cause the whole process to derail.

The solution

Our lawyers can guide you through a Divorce by Mutual Agreement, using our expertise to help avoid it becoming contested. Having an experienced lawyer act, and taking an objective stance, means we will apply logic to achieve the best outcome. At the same time, we will take your instructions to understand the situation and what means most to you.

We can also assist you in making the correct financial decisions. What you believe to be a good deal at the time may not be enough for you to live on in the future. Matters such as earning capacities and future expenses are sometimes difficult concepts to grasp and understand. Getting the best legal advice and knowing you are receiving the most out of the divorce, you will also achieve greater peace of mind.

The preparation of documents can be difficult and stressful. Our lawyers have years of experience helping people prepare their documents succinctly and accurately.

Having advice and help with negotiations on when to insist on terms and when to make concessions to get the things which are most important to you may be invaluable.

Letting us take the reins will free up your time and allow you to continue working and being part of your children’s life. We can also advise you on making the best care arrangements for your children.

Should the divorce process deteriorate, we can present your case if a dispute or disagreement cannot be amicably settled.

We are here to advise, represent you, and make the divorce process as stress-free as possible. Don’t hesitate to contact our lawyers if you are considering a divorce in Singapore.

PKWA Ranked as “Singapore’s Best Law Firms 2023” in Family Law by Straits Times

Divorce

PKWA Law has again been recognised by as one of “Singapore’s Best Law Firms” for family law & conveyancing in 2023 by The Straits Times. This is the third straight year that the firm has been named by the Straits Times as one of Singapore’s best law firms.

The lists of the most-recommended law firms by legal categories was published on 24 November 2022, both in The Straits Times’ newspaper edition as well as on ST Online.

PKWA Law is recognised in 2 categories:

Family Law
Conveyancing

As compared to last year’s ranking, this year ST managed to reach out to over 6,000+ professionals and gathered more than 12,000 recommendations. The “Singapore’s Best Law Firms 2023” list is based on recommendations provided by lawyers (peer-to-peer survey), in-house lawyers (corporate legal departments) and clients in 18 different fields of law.

We’d like to express our thanks to our clients for their ongoing trust and confidence in us. It is a true pleasure to have served you and we look forward to continuing to work closely with you in the future.

We’d also like to recognise the endless dedication and hard work of all our lawyers and staff. It is a credit to them that our clients keep returning to us and we’d like to dedicate this award to our teams who keep PKWA running smoothly.

PKWA Helps Husband Win Court of Appeal Case – Husband wins 75% up from 25% of $13.6m

Divorce, News

Family lawyers from PKWA Law have helped a client (the husband) win a Court of Appeal case on the division of matrimonial assets.

The husband won 75% of S$13.6 million in matrimonial assets, up from 25%. This is arguably one of the highest swings and the most substantial reversals on the division of matrimonial assets on appeal.

The Court of Appeal judges comprising Judge of Appeal Judith Prakash and Justices Belinda Ang and Woo Bih Li released a 60-page decision on 25 February 2020. The apex court had described the case as “complicated”, “challenging”, and “highly unusual”.

The case of TQU v TQT [2020] SGCA 08 is highly complex. The summary case:

The case was highly contentious. “Although this was a long marriage, the facts relating to the breakdown of the marriage were highly unusual… because of the sheer extent of conflict from 2001 onwards,” the three judges who heard the appeal wrote.
The wife had filed numerous complaints against her husband with the authorities. This included allegations that he had unlawfully sold medicine and bribed patients, which eventually led to him being charged (and acquitted) in court.
Between 2001 to 2016, she filed 3 divorce applications against the husband.
After an interim judgment of divorce was finally issued in 2016, a High Court judge awarded the husband 25 per cent of the matrimonial assets.
The husband then engaged PKWA Law to take his case to the Court of Appeal. PKWA Law’s team prepared, drafted and filed the Court of Appeal arguments and paperwork (including the Appellant’s Case, Record of Appeal, Skeletal Arguments and the Bundle of Authorities). The husband appeared at the appeal hearing himself.
The Court of Appeal, in a 60 page written judgment, overturned the High Court decision and increased the husband’s share to 75%, up from 25%.
The assets – valued at about S$13.6 million in total – included nearly a dozen properties in Singapore, China and Malaysia and shares in various listed companies.
Two major points of contention were the source of the funds used to buy the properties and the direct and indirect contributions of the couple. The wife alleged that they were acquired solely with income from a clinic her husband had opened, where she had helped out and that her indirect contributions were substantial.
“Although this was a long marriage, the facts relating to the breakdown of the marriage were highly unusual… because of the sheer extent of conflict from 2001 onwards,” the three judges who heard the appeal wrote.
The judges also found a “negative value” in the wife’s indirect contributions due to her misconduct in making the complaints, including the one that resulted in the husband’s criminal trial. “These acts of the wife amounted to harassment and undermined the co-operative partnership that marriage is intended to be,” the three judges said.
“Courts have long strived to reach a fair outcome on the facts of each case, and the factual matrix of the marriage before us has complicated the matter and made our task more challenging,” wrote Justice Woo Bih Li on behalf of the 3 Court of Appeal judges.
This case shows that while the courts have consistently “said that marriage is an equal co-operative partnership of efforts, this does not mean that the contributions of both parties in a marriage are always equal. Therefore, the court must have regard to all the circumstances of the case, including the extent of the contributions made by each party towards acquiring matrimonial assets and to the welfare of the family.”

Issues raised by PKWA Law in written submissions to Court of Appeal

The PKWA Law team had raised the following issues in the Appellant’s Case on behalf of the Husband:

The Judge failed to determine the operative dates for determining and valuing the matrimonial assets. The operative date for determination should be 28 June 2010, the date from which both parties agreed the marriage had broken down. The operative date for valuation should be March 2006, December 2001 or December 2010.
The Judge erred by including properties that were gifts from his parents or were no longer in existence as matrimonial assets. The Pender Court property in Singapore and the Liang Feng Mansion and the Regalia properties, both in Shanghai, China, were gifts from the Husband’s mother, while the Hai Hong Plaza and Sun Island International Club properties were no longer in existence as of the operative date of determination of the matrimonial assets.
The Judge erred in his finding on the parties’ direct contributions. The main source of the funds used to acquire the properties was the Husband’s gifts or inheritance from his parents, which are solely attributable to the Husband, not the clinic’s income. Moreover, even if the funds had been from the Clinic, the Husband was the sole owner and resident doctor, and the income should be attributed solely to him.
The Judge erred in his finding on the parties’ indirect contributions. The Wife was largely absent from the family after 2001, and before that, she had the assistance of helpers and the Husband’s mother. The Husband was largely responsible for the care of the children, and the ratio of indirect contributions should be 90:10 in his favour.
The Judge failed to consider the Wife’s misconduct as she caused harm to the children and constantly embroiled the family in vexatious legal proceedings.
The Judge erred in his finding that equal division was appropriate before any adjustment. This was not a long single-income marriage, and the Husband’s contributions far outweighed the Wife’s contributions.
The Judge erred in drawing an adverse inference against the Husband and awarding the Wife an additional 25% of the matrimonial assets. The Wife also failed to make full disclosure.
The Husband submits that the Judge should have used the classification methodology. Accordingly, he submits that the value of the foreign properties and the Singapore properties purchased before 2001 should be divided 95:5 in his favour, each party should retain the Singapore properties purchased after 2001 in their own name, and the value of all other assets should be divided 72:28 in his favour.

Need Guidance on Divorce in Singapore?

Family law matters often overlap, particularly where divorce, children and financial arrangements are involved. If you are navigating a separation, you may wish to read more about the divorce process in Singapore or speak with an experienced divorce lawyer in Singapore at PKWA Law Practice LLC for guidance based on your specific circumstances.