XZI v XZJ

In Divorce No 4098 of 2025, the Wife (XZI) filed Summons No 2201 of 2025, an ex parte application to serve the Originating Application for Divorce and the Notice of Proceedings on the Husband (XZJ) by email to two addresses she said were still active, or alternatively via Singpass.

According to her affidavit, a process server had twice been told at the Husband's registered address that he was not home, and his solicitors said they had no instructions to accept service because he did not accept service of Singapore matrimonial proceedings. In a letter dated 8 May 2025 the same solicitors had indicated he was prepared to consent to a divorce by mutual agreement; a letter dated 22 August 2025 took the opposite stance on service.

1. Whether personal service on the Husband was impractical so that substituted service should be ordered.
2. Whether service by email and via Singpass would be effective in bringing the papers to the Husband's attention.
3. Whether the costs of the substituted service application should be decided at once or reserved.

Personal service of an originating application is required, but substituted service is allowed where personal service is impractical. Given the failed attempts and the solicitors' stance, the court was satisfied that this test was met, and email and Singpass would bring the papers to the Husband's notice.

On costs, the question was whether the application was needed at all. The change in the solicitors' position hinted at possible evasion of service, but the Husband might have had legitimate reasons, so the issue was left to a later judge.

The Assistant Registrar granted the application and ordered substituted service by email or via Singpass as prayed. Costs were reserved to the judge hearing any stay application or, failing one, the judge hearing the ancillary matters.