WVG v WVH & Anor

Q: Which legislation does [2024] SGHCF 48 consider?

The judgment refers to Mental Capacity Act (Cap 177A). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2024] SGHCF 48 High Court (Family Division) 20 December 2024 HCF/OSN 11/2024 13 min read

6 cases cited

Outcome

Application granted

I grant the application to restore DCA 123. I direct that the Appeal Documents are to be filed within seven days of this order.

Source: [2024] SGHCF 48, High Court (Family Division), decided 20 December 2024. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Family Division)
Decided	20 December 2024
Judge	Choo Han Teck
Charges / claim	Family Law
Outcome	Application granted
Counsel	K&L Gates Straits Law LLC, Manicka & Co, Benjamin Kang, Eva Teh Jing Hui, Joan Lim-Casanova, Manickavasagam s/o R M Karuppiah Pillai

Source: [2024] SGHCF 48, High Court (Family Division), decided 20 December 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Family Law — Procedure — Extension of time

Practice Areas

Family Law

Judges (1)

Choo Han Teck Delivered

Counsel (6)

K&L Gates Straits Law LLC Firm Manicka & Co Firm Benjamin Kang Counsel Respondent Eva Teh Jing Hui Counsel Respondent Joan Lim-Casanova Counsel Respondent Manickavasagam s/o R M Karuppiah Pillai Counsel Applicant

Parties (3)

WVG Applicant WVH Respondent WVI Respondent

Case Significance

WVG v WVH and another [2024] SGHCF 48 is a reserved judgment of the General Division of the High Court (Family Division) (Originating Summons (New Legislation) No 11 of 2024) delivered by Choo Han Teck J on 20 December 2024, following a hearing on 27 November 2024. The underlying dispute concerned the appointment of deputies over the personal welfare, property and affairs of an individual, P, who was diagnosed with dementia in January 2020 and is presently 71 years old. The first respondent, WVH, is P's eldest daughter and the second respondent, WVI, his youngest son. The applicant, WVG, a 62-year-old Singaporean woman, had been in an extra-marital relationship with P since 2014. In July 2022 the respondents applied to be appointed as joint deputies, primarily to instruct counsel to act for P in divorce proceedings, without disclosing the relationship between P and the applicant, who was neither served nor informed of those proceedings.

[2024] SGHCF 48 explained

WVG v WVH & Anor ([2024] SGHCF 48) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Family Division) on 20 December 2024. It is categorised under Family Law. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. 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 [2024] SGHCF 48 about?

WVG v WVH & Anor ([2024] SGHCF 48) is a High Court (Family Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Family Law — Procedure — Extension of time”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2024] SGHCF 48 consider?

The judgment refers to Mental Capacity Act (Cap 177A). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

This application arose from a dispute over the appointment of deputies for an individual, P, who was diagnosed with dementia and had lost mental capacity, and involved a 62-year-old woman who had been in a long-term relationship with P and who had been appointed by a District Judge as a joint deputy over P's personal welfare after her application to revoke an earlier deputyship order made in favour of P's children was dismissed. The applicant sought to restore her cross-appeal (DCA 123), which had lapsed after the appeal documents were not filed in time owing to her counsel's fault. The High Court (Family Division), per Choo Han Teck J, granted the application to restore DCA 123 and directed the appeal documents to be filed within seven days, and further directed the applicant's counsel to show cause under the Family Justice Rules 2014 why he should not personally bear the costs of the proceedings.

What was WVG v WVH [2024] SGHCF 48 about?

Decided by Choo Han Teck J on 20 December 2024 in the Family Justice Courts, it concerned a Family Law extension of time issue arising from deputyship proceedings over P, a 71-year-old man with dementia, where the applicant WVG was not served or informed of the respondents' application to be appointed joint deputies.