WYH v WYG
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
WYH v WYG [2024] SGHCF 34 was decided by Choo Han Teck J in the General Division of the High Court (Family Division) in District Court Appeal No 45 of 2024, heard on 26 September 2024 with grounds of decision dated 2 October 2024. The parties are both 45 years old, their marriage lasted about 17 years before the respondent (the Mother) filed for divorce, and they have three children aged 18, 17 and 13. Judgment was granted in September 2020, and the parties entered a consent order on 2 March 2021 which included payment of $1,000 maintenance for each child.
On the Mother's application to vary the children's maintenance, the court on 5 July 2022 increased it to $1,500 a month for each child and imposed an additional $800 per child on an annual basis for additional expenses, a head not provided for in the 2021 consent order. On 18 October 2023 the appellant (the Father) filed an application to vary the July 2022 order, seeking to reduce maintenance to $500 a month for each child and the annual expenses to $300 per child; that variation application was dismissed by the court below. The Father appealed against the dismissal, and Choo Han Teck J dismissed the appeal. The catchword is Family Law - Maintenance - Child. The appellant was represented by I.R.B. Law LLP, including Quek Liuyong Uthai; the respondent by Sterling Law Corporation, including Hilary Mahesh Rupawalia and Tan Siew Kim.
Summary
This was a father's District Court appeal against the dismissal of his application to vary a 2022 maintenance order, by which he had sought to reduce the maintenance for each of the parties' three children from S$1,500 to S$500 a month and the annual expenses from S$800 to S$300. Choo Han Teck J observed that a party dissatisfied with a consent order on maintenance must apply to vary rather than appeal, and that the applicant must show that variation is reasonable and for the welfare of the child. Finding that the father had not shown any change of circumstances and lacked supporting income evidence, the court dismissed the appeal and made no order as to costs.
What did the court decide in WYH v WYG about child maintenance?
In [2024] SGHCF 34, Choo Han Teck J dismissed the Father's appeal. The Father had sought to reduce maintenance from $1,500 to $500 a month per child and the annual expenses from $800 to $300 per child, but his variation application had already been dismissed by the court below.
What was the maintenance history in WYH v WYG [2024] SGHCF 34?
A 2 March 2021 consent order set $1,000 maintenance per child. On the Mother's application, the court increased this on 5 July 2022 to $1,500 a month per child plus $800 annually per child for additional expenses. The Father's later application to reduce these sums was dismissed.
Cited By (1)
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHCF 34)