UBQ v UBR
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Appellate Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Hoo Sheau Peng, Woo Bih Li |
| Charges / claim | Family Law |
Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 10, High Court (Appellate Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (2)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
UBQ v UBR and another matter [2023] SGHC(A) 10 was heard in the Appellate Division of the High Court by Woo Bih Li JAD and Hoo Sheau Peng J, with judgment reserved on 23 March 2023, in Civil Appeal No 45 of 2022 and Summons 29 of 2022. The divorced parties, referred to as the Father and the Mother, have two sons and had been engaged in litigation for more than seven years. The appeal was the Father's appeal against the High Court judge's decision in HCF/DT 1861/2015 dismissing his applications in HCF/SUM 326/2021 and HCF/SUM 370/2021 concerning the welfare of the children, with the grounds of decision reported at UBQ v UBR [2022] SGHCF 13.
[2023] SGHC(A) 10 explained
UBQ v UBR ([2023] SGHC(A) 10) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 23 March 2023. It is categorised under Family Law. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2023] SGHC(A) 10 about?
UBQ v UBR ([2023] SGHC(A) 10) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Family Law — Custody — Access”, “Family Law — Child — Appointment of therapist”, and “Family Law — Custody — Care and control — Security for overseas travel”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 10 consider?
The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2023] SGHC(A) 10?
Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC(A) 10 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.
Summary
This family law appeal in the Appellate Division of the High Court arose from divorced parents, referred to as the Father and the Mother, who had litigated for over seven years over the welfare of their two sons, including care and control, overseas travel arrangements, access and the appointment of a therapist. The Father appealed against a High Court judge's dismissal of his applications and also sought to adduce further evidence. The court dismissed the appeal, affirmed the earlier orders and directed the Father to pay the Mother $5,000 in expenses across the three matters.
What was the subject of the appeal in UBQ v UBR [2023] SGHC(A) 10?
The appeal was the Father's appeal against the High Court judge's decision in HCF/DT 1861/2015 dismissing his applications HCF/SUM 326/2021 and HCF/SUM 370/2021, which related to the welfare of the two children of the divorced parties.
Which court and judges heard UBQ v UBR [2023] SGHC(A) 10?
The matter was heard in the Appellate Division of the High Court by Woo Bih Li JAD and Hoo Sheau Peng J, in Civil Appeal No 45 of 2022 and Summons 29 of 2022, with judgment reserved and delivered on 23 March 2023.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (8)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC(A) 10)