WKN v WKM
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Family Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Choo Han Teck |
| Charges / claim | Family Law |
| Counsel | Crossbows LLP, Winchester Law LLC, Anuradha d/o Krishan Chand Sharma, Gulab Sobhraj, Low Wan Kwong Michael |
Source: [2023] SGHCF 25, High Court (Family Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
WKN v WKM [2023] SGHCF 25 is the grounds of decision of Choo Han Teck J in the General Division of the High Court (Family Division), delivered on 15 May 2023 in District Court Appeal No 2 of 2023. The appellant Mother and respondent Father married on 12 February 2012 and have a daughter, then 11 years old; under ancillary orders made final on 17 March 2017 they held joint custody, with care and control residing with the Father and liberal access to the Mother. From 9 November 2021 the Child began residing with the Mother, who alleged emotional abuse and neglect by the Father, prompting cross-applications on custody, care and control and access.
Summary
The mother appealed against a District Judge's decision dismissing her application to vary ancillary orders and enforcing the father's care and control of their daughter, with the mother's access reduced to supervised access. After hearing submissions and interviewing the child, the court found it was in the child's interests to live with the mother. The appeal was allowed, care and control was transferred to the mother, and the father was granted liberal access, with no order as to costs.
What was WKN v WKM [2023] SGHCF 25 about?
Choo Han Teck J heard District Court Appeal No 2 of 2023 concerning custody, care and control, and access to a daughter aged 11. Care and control had resided with the Father before the Child moved to the Mother in November 2021. Delivered 15 May 2023.
Why did the custody arrangements change in [2023] SGHCF 25?
From 9 November 2021, the Child began residing with the Mother because she alleged emotional abuse and neglect of the Child by the Father and his domestic helper. This change was made without a court order, prompting cross-applications by both parents.
Cited By (1)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments on the same subject, most closely matched first.
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHCF 25)