VHK v VHL
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Family Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Choo Han Teck |
| Charges / claim | Family Law |
| Counsel | Allen & Gledhill LLP, Attorney-General's Chambers, Abigail Fernandez, Chng Luey Chi, Ho Jiayun, Tham Hsu Hsien |
Source: [2024] SGHCF 7, High Court (Family Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
VHK v VHL [2024] SGHCF 7 was a grounds of decision of the Family Justice Courts (Divorce (Transferred) No 2504 of 2018, Summons No 276 of 2023) delivered by Choo Han Teck J on 31 January 2024, following a hearing on 25 January 2024. The catchwords concern Family Law — Custody — Access — whether disclosure of a party's bank statements and IP address is allowed. The judgment described a history in which the plaintiff mother denied the defendant, her former husband and the father of their daughter, access to their child, with matters coming to a head in 2022 when the plaintiff breached a court order by refusing to send the daughter to see the defendant, who works as a doctor in the United States. The court recounted ordering, on 25 October 2022, that the plaintiff produce the child in court, which the plaintiff did not do.
[2024] SGHCF 7 explained
VHK v VHL ([2024] SGHCF 7) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Family Division) on 31 January 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 7 about?
VHK v VHL ([2024] SGHCF 7) is a High Court (Family Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Family Law — Custody — Access — Whether disclosure of party’s bank statements and IP address is allowed”, 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 7 consider?
The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97) and Government Proceedings Act (Cap 121). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
In divorce proceedings in which the father (a doctor working in the United States) had been granted sole custody, care and control of the parties' daughter after the mother repeatedly denied access and a warrant of arrest was issued against her, the father applied by summons to compel DBS Bank to disclose the mother's account details and transaction history and to compel the Supreme Court to disclose the mother's IP address from earlier Zoom proceedings, in an effort to locate the mother and child. The High Court (Family Division), per Choo Han Teck J, accepted that s 34(1) of the Government Proceedings Act applies only where the Supreme Court is a party, so there was no legal basis to compel disclosure of the IP address, and added that an IP address is sensitive information that ought not be released in aid of a private manhunt. The application for disclosure of the IP address was dismissed with no order as to costs.
What was VHK v VHL [2024] SGHCF 7 about?
Decided by Choo Han Teck J in the Family Justice Courts on 31 January 2024, it concerned custody and access disputes, including whether disclosure of a party's bank statements and IP address was allowed, against a background of the plaintiff mother repeatedly denying the father access to their child.
What access dispute did the court describe in VHK v VHL ([2024] SGHCF 7)?
The court described the plaintiff mother's long history of denying the defendant father access, with matters coming to a head in 2022 when she breached a court order by refusing to send their daughter to see the father, who works as a doctor in the United States.
Statutes Cited
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 ([2024] SGHCF 7)