YHY v YHZ
Key facts
| Court | Family Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Kathryn Thong |
| Charges / claim | Family Law |
| Counsel | A C Fergusson Law Corporation, Gloria James-Civetta & Co, Chong Xin Yi, Tan Yu Poh Susan, Tan-Goh Song Gek Alice |
Source: [2026] SGFC 121, Family Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
YHY v YHZ [2026] SGFC 121 is a decision of the Family Court, with grounds of decision given by District Judge Kathryn Thong on 28 August 2026. The Applicant, the maternal aunt of a child, applied under section 17(1)(d) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 to be appointed joint guardian with the child's biological father, the Respondent. She later sought to discontinue. The issues were whether to grant permission to discontinue under P 16 r 4 of the Family Justice (General) Rules 2024 and who should bear costs. The court directed a social services home visit, then granted permission to discontinue and ordered the Aunt to pay costs of $1,200 inclusive of disbursements.
[2026] SGFC 121 explained
YHY v YHZ ([2026] SGFC 121) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Family Court on 28 August 2026. 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 [2026] SGFC 121 about?
YHY v YHZ ([2026] SGFC 121) is a Family Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Family Law — Therapeutic justice”, “Family Law — Guardianship — Testamentary guardian”, and “Family Law — Procedure — Discontinuance — Permission under P 16 r 4 of the Family Justice (General) Rules 2024 — Child’s welfare”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGFC 121 consider?
The judgment refers to Guardianship of Infants Act (Cap 122) and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGFC 121 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2026] SGHC 125, [2026] SGHCF 4, and [2024] SGHCF 46, and 2 more. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
The Family Court dealt with an application by YHY, the maternal aunt of an 11-year-old child, to be appointed a joint guardian with the child's biological father, YHZ, under the court's wardship jurisdiction. The court declined immediate permission to discontinue and directed social services to report on the child living with the father. After the report, it granted permission to discontinue the application and ordered the Aunt to pay the Respondent costs of $1,200 inclusive of disbursements.
What was YHY v YHZ [2026] SGFC 121 about?
The child's maternal aunt applied to be appointed joint guardian with the child's father under the wardship jurisdiction, then sought to discontinue. The court sought a social services report before granting permission and ordering costs against the aunt.
What costs were ordered in [2026] SGFC 121?
The court ordered the Aunt to pay the father costs of $1,200 inclusive of disbursements for OAG 26/2026, finding the application misconceived in its juridical basis and featuring serious but bare allegations against him.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (10)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGFC 121)