YAO v YAP
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
In YAO v YAP [2026] SGFC 40, District Judge Kevin Ho of the Family Court on 20 March 2026 resolved cross-applications for guardianship, care and control, and access orders in respect of a daughter L, born 10 September 2020, whose parents married on 31 December 2023 after a prior relationship. Because the marriage had subsisted for less than three years at the time of the breakdown in mid-2024, the parties could not yet file for divorce, making interim guardianship applications under the Guardianship of Infants Act the only available avenue. The father (YAO) and mother (YAP) each filed separate originating applications — FC/OAG 161/2025 and FC/OAG 181/2025. L was living with the mother, with the father having regular access, and was due to begin primary school in 2027. Josephine Chong of Josephine Chong LLC represented the father; Hoon Shu Mei and Joyce Rappa of Drew & Napier LLC acted for the mother.
Why could the parents in YAO v YAP [2026] SGFC 40 not file for divorce when seeking custody orders?
The parties in YAO v YAP married on 31 December 2023 but their marriage broke down in mid-2024. Because Singapore divorce proceedings require the marriage to have subsisted for at least three years, they had to pursue guardianship applications under the Guardianship of Infants Act instead.
What interim family orders did District Judge Kevin Ho decide in YAO v YAP [2026] SGFC 40?
District Judge Kevin Ho determined cross-applications for custody, care and control, and access concerning daughter L (born 10 September 2020), balancing the father YAO's FC/OAG 181/2025 and the mother YAP's FC/OAG 161/2025 applications, with judgment delivered on 20 March 2026.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (7)
Cited By (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGFC 40)