fc_judgments: 33
Data source: lawnet.sg/lawnet/web/lawnet/free-resources
This data as json
| _id | _item_id | tags | date | court | case-number | title | citation | url | counsel | timestamp | coram | html | _commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | 226f9aac316454f6fb3f1585cc57b5d106aab816 | [
"Family Law \u2013 Children \u2013 Variation of care and control",
"Family Law \u2013 Children \u2013 Variation of maintenance"
] |
2024-05-28 | Family Court | D 4396/2019 (FC/SUM 1409/2023 and FC/SUM 2728/2023) | WWA v WWB | [2024] SGFC 33 | https://www.lawnet.sg:443/lawnet/web/lawnet/free-resources?p_p_id=freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&_freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet_action=openContentPage&_freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet_docId=%2FJudgment%2F31572-SSP.xml | [
"Ms Bernice Loo Ming Nee and Ms Sophia Rossman (Allen & Gledhill LLP) for the plaintiff",
"Ms Nur Amalina Binte Kamal (IKA Law LLC) for the defendant."
] |
2024-06-03T16:00:00Z[GMT] | Chia Wee Kiat | <root><head><title>WWA v WWB</title></head><content><div class="contentsOfFile"> <h2 align="center" class="title"><span class="caseTitle"> WWA <em>v</em> WWB </span><br><span class="Citation offhyperlink"><a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/31572-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 33</a></span></h2><table id="info-table"><tbody><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Case Number</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">D 4396/2019 (FC/SUM 1409/2023 and FC/SUM 2728/2023)</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Decision Date</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">28 May 2024</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Tribunal/Court</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">Family Court</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Coram</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> Chia Wee Kiat </td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Counsel Name(s)</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> Ms Bernice Loo Ming Nee and Ms Sophia Rossman (Allen & Gledhill LLP) for the plaintiff; Ms Nur Amalina Binte Kamal (IKA Law LLC) for the defendant. </td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Parties</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> WWA — WWB </td></tr></tbody></table> <p class="txt-body"><span style="font-style:italic">Family Law</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">Children</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">Variation of care and control</span></p> <p class="txt-body"><span style="font-style:italic">Family Law</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">Children</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">Variation of maintenance</span></p> <p></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td width="80%"><p class="Judg-Hearing-Date">28 May 2024</p></td><td><p class="Judg-Date-Reserved"></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p> <p class="Judg-Author"> District Judge Chia Wee Kiat:</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_1"></a>1 In this decision, the Plaintiff shall be referred to as the “Mother” and the Defendant shall be referred to as the “Father”.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_2"></a>2 The parties were married on 7 June 2007.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_1" id="Ftn_1_1"><sup>[note: 1]</sup></a></span> They have two children of the marriage, [H]<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_2" id="Ftn_2_1"><sup>[note: 2]</sup></a></span> and [C]<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_3" id="Ftn_3_1"><sup>[note: 3]</sup></a></span>, aged 12 and 11 respectively. The parties and the children are all US citizens and Singapore Permanent Residents.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_4" id="Ftn_4_1"><sup>[note: 4]</sup></a></span> The parties have been living and working in Singapore since June 2009, while the children were both born and raised in Singapore.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_5" id="Ftn_5_1"><sup>[note: 5]</sup></a></span> The Mother is currently unemployed<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_6" id="Ftn_6_1"><sup>[note: 6]</sup></a></span> while the Father works as a Global Head of Enterprise Sales at a school.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_7" id="Ftn_7_1"><sup>[note: 7]</sup></a></span> The children attend an international school in Singapore.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_8" id="Ftn_8_1"><sup>[note: 8]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_3"></a>3 On 10 September 2019, the Mother commenced divorce proceedings.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_9" id="Ftn_9_1"><sup>[note: 9]</sup></a></span> Interim Judgment was granted on 3 March 2020 with a consent order on all the ancillary issues.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_10" id="Ftn_10_1"><sup>[note: 10]</sup></a></span> Pursuant to the consent order, the parties have joint custody of the children with care and control to the Mother and access to the Father.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_11" id="Ftn_11_1"><sup>[note: 11]</sup></a></span> The consent order also provided, among other matters, that the Father shall pay the Mother monthly maintenance for the two children at $8,500 a month.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_12" id="Ftn_12_1"><sup>[note: 12]</sup></a></span> Specifically, clause 3(e) of the Interim Judgment states as follows:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff monthly maintenance for the 2 children at S$8,500 per month to be paid on the first day of every month by depositing this sum into her account at DBS with effect from the first of March. Prior to the commencement of the maintenance payment, status quo on financial provision shall continue until 29 February 2020. In addition, the Defendant shall provide medical insurance for the children and will bear the children’s medical and dental expenses to a maximum amount of S$20,000 a year. Non-insurable medical expenses above this amount of $20,000 shall be shared equally between parties. In addition, the children’s 529 college savings accounts shall be jointly managed by both the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the children’s benefit and welfare.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_4"></a>4 On 3 June 2020, Final Judgment was issued.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_13" id="Ftn_13_1"><sup>[note: 13]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_5"></a>5 On 3 May 2023, the Father filed a variation application <em>vide</em> FC/SUM 1409/2023 (“SUM 1409”)<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_14" id="Ftn_14_1"><sup>[note: 14]</sup></a></span> to reverse care and control of the children to him and consequently for the Mother to pay the Father reasonable maintenance for the children.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_6"></a>6 On 30 August 2023, the Mother filed a cross application <em>vide</em> FC/SUM 2728 (“SUM 2728”)<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_15" id="Ftn_15_1"><sup>[note: 15]</sup></a></span> to increase the monthly maintenance for the children from S$8,500 to S$21,000 per month.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_7"></a>7 At the hearing on 8 November 2023, I called for a Custody Evaluation Report (“CER”) and reserved my decision. On 1 April 2024, having received and considered the CER, and having also given careful consideration to the parties’ submissions and affidavits, I made the following orders:</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_a"></a>(a) The parents shall have joint custody and shared care and control of the children.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_b"></a>(b) The Father shall have care and control of the children from Thursday after school to Sunday 12pm.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_c"></a>(c) The Mother shall have care and control of the children from Sunday 12pm to Thursday after school.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_d"></a>(d) School holidays shall be split equally between the parents with such arrangements to be mutually agreed. The parents shall ensure that the children are accompanied by a domestic helper or a trusted adult who is familiar with the children while the children are in their respective care during the holidays.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_e"></a>(e) The parents are at liberty to travel overseas with the children subject to giving the other party at least one month's notice of the duration of travel, itinerary of travel, including flight details, accommodation address and emergency contact details. The notice period may be shortened by consent of the parties. The Mother shall hand over the children's passports to the Father at least two weeks before his intended overseas travels with the children, and the Father shall return the children's passports back to the Mother within 48 hours of return to Singapore.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_f"></a>(f) The parents may mutually agree to vary the care arrangements.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_7-p2_g"></a>(g) The maintenance for the two children at S$8,500 per month payable by the Father to the Mother is to remain.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_8"></a>8 On 15 April 2024, the Father filed a Notice of Appeal <em>vide</em> HCF/DCA 35/2024 against part of my decision. The Mother has since filed an application for an extension of time to appeal against my decision.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_9"></a>9 I set out my grounds of decision which incorporate and elaborate on the brief grounds rendered earlier.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">The Father’s position</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_10"></a>10 The Father says that since the conclusion of the divorce proceedings, the Mother has been drinking excessively and admitted herself to rehabilitation programme, although without success.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_16" id="Ftn_16_1"><sup>[note: 16]</sup></a></span> He cites various incidents, such as one in late 2020 when the children informed him that the Mother passed out while dining with them at [Restaurant X] after consuming too much alcohol.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_17" id="Ftn_17_1"><sup>[note: 17]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_11"></a>11 The Father says that the Mother’s conduct has been on a severe decline despite her attempts at rehabilitation and has got to the point that the Mother is unable to perform her parenting duties for the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_18" id="Ftn_18_1"><sup>[note: 18]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_12"></a>12 The Father says that the Mother has been having suicidal thoughts and expressing her suicidal ideations to the children and the domestic helper.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_19" id="Ftn_19_1"><sup>[note: 19]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_13"></a>13 The Father says that the Mother has been increasingly hostile towards him and the children. For example, she takes issue with the fact that the Father has moved on from the marriage and started a new relationship with his partner, who happens to be a Muslim.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_20" id="Ftn_20_1"><sup>[note: 20]</sup></a></span> The Father says that the Mother unilaterally changes the children’s access plans without consulting him and this has in turn disrupted the children’s time with him.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_21" id="Ftn_21_1"><sup>[note: 21]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_14"></a>14 The Father says that the Mother was high functioning and held high positions in her past employment, but has been unemployed since 2021. The Mother spends her time cooped up in her study at home and is also more reclusive, erratic, and prone to self-inflicted injuries/harm. The Father says that these are clear symptoms of the Mother’s worsening alcohol addiction and underlying mental health issues, contributing to her inability to be present with the children and perform her day to day tasks.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_22" id="Ftn_22_1"><sup>[note: 22]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_15"></a>15 The Father believes that the children’s interests would be best served by having them reside with him and under his care.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_23" id="Ftn_23_1"><sup>[note: 23]</sup></a></span> Consequently, the maintenance orders should also be varied for the Mother to pay reasonable maintenance for the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_24" id="Ftn_24_1"><sup>[note: 24]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">The Mother’s position</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_16"></a>16 The Mother says that she resigned from her job with [Employer A] in 2016 to spend more time with the children and took up a role in 2018 with [Employer B] in Singapore. She has been unemployed since September 2021 to focus on her recovery.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_25" id="Ftn_25_1"><sup>[note: 25]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_17"></a>17 The Mother says that parties came to an agreement on the children’s care arrangements after lengthy negotiations. Both were independently advised by respective lawyers and both knew what the circumstances were at the time they made the agreement and made the agreement knowing what the terms meant. Therefore the agreement and hence the consent order should be respected <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_26" id="Ftn_26_1"><sup>[note: 26]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_18"></a>18 The Mother says that parties agreed it would be in the best interests of the children that they remain in her sole care, as she had been their primary caregiver since they were born.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_27" id="Ftn_27_1"><sup>[note: 27]</sup></a></span> Besides being a present and nurturing figure for the children, she also does her best to communicate with the Father in the spirit of being a committed co-parent.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_28" id="Ftn_28_1"><sup>[note: 28]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_19"></a>19 The Mother says that the maternal grandparents are both retired and have time on their hands to help and are always more than delighted to spend time with the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_29" id="Ftn_29_1"><sup>[note: 29]</sup></a></span> The Mother also has a very good support network at home. The helper has been a huge part of the children’s lives since 2014.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_30" id="Ftn_30_1"><sup>[note: 30]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_20"></a>20 The Mother says that the children are thriving under the current care arrangement for the last 3 years.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_31" id="Ftn_31_1"><sup>[note: 31]</sup></a></span> The Father’s time with the children actually fits in nicely with their current routine, and the children are accustomed to these access arrangements already.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_32" id="Ftn_32_1"><sup>[note: 32]</sup></a></span> The children are well adjusted and enjoy their current routine. A reversal of the arrangements would cause a huge upheaval to the children, and would be highly and unnecessarily disruptive.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_33" id="Ftn_33_1"><sup>[note: 33]</sup></a></span> A variation of the care and control orders would not be in the children’s best interests.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_34" id="Ftn_34_1"><sup>[note: 34]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_21"></a>21 Further, the Mother says that the Father has not shown any material change in circumstances to warrant a variation.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_35" id="Ftn_35_1"><sup>[note: 35]</sup></a></span> The Mother says that her struggle with alcohol in the past is no secret and the Father himself has been aware of this for a long time, even before the consent order was made.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_36" id="Ftn_36_1"><sup>[note: 36]</sup></a></span> It was a personal problem which she confronted by going for therapy and occasional wellness retreat for a few days.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_37" id="Ftn_37_1"><sup>[note: 37]</sup></a></span> These issues did not render her an unfit parent<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_38" id="Ftn_38_1"><sup>[note: 38]</sup></a></span>, and the Father had consented to sole care and control being granted to her in the consent order despite knowing that the Mother faced these issues.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_39" id="Ftn_39_1"><sup>[note: 39]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_22"></a>22 The Mother says that it is ironic that the Father harps so heavily on her issues with alcohol<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_40" id="Ftn_40_1"><sup>[note: 40]</sup></a></span> when the Father too has alcohol dependency issues for a long time and was in rehabilitation.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_41" id="Ftn_41_1"><sup>[note: 41]</sup></a></span> The Mother says that the Father attended five weeks of treatment for his own issues with alcohol in early 2023 and would have hoped that the Father would have been more understanding given the common issues that they have both encountered in their lives.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_42" id="Ftn_42_1"><sup>[note: 42]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_23"></a>23 The Mother says that it is untrue that the issues have worsened.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_43" id="Ftn_43_1"><sup>[note: 43]</sup></a></span> She disputes the Father’s allegations that her conduct has been on a severe decline, that she is unable to perform her parenting duties for the children,<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_44" id="Ftn_44_1"><sup>[note: 44]</sup></a></span> or that she has been having suicidal thoughts or has been expressing suicidal thoughts to the children and the helper.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_45" id="Ftn_45_1"><sup>[note: 45]</sup></a></span> The Mother says that she is sober and continues to work diligently to maintain her sobriety and to stay on the road of recovery. She has been working each week with two psychiatrists and a therapist at a very highly respected clinic.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_46" id="Ftn_46_1"><sup>[note: 46]</sup></a></span> She exhibited a memo dated 28 June 2023 from her doctor which stated as follows:<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_47" id="Ftn_47_1"><sup>[note: 47]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">[Mother] has been receiving treatment for her Mixed Depressive and Anxiety Disorder with associated Alcohol Use Disorder with Promises since Aug 2016.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">I have taken over her treatment since 19 June 2023 for her Mixed Depressive and Anxiety Disorder and Alcohol Use. From discussion with her therapists and previous doctors in charge, we have advised her how to optimise the treatment for her Mixed Depressive and Anxiety Disorder. She was also advised to stop her stressful work to focus on her recovery from her mental health conditions and care for the children.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">She has made progress and had been regular with her treatment since discharge. She is currently stable and we are monitoring her condition with regular blood tests. She is not suicidal nor violent and definitely not a threat to her children.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_24"></a>24 The Mother says the issues are under control, and her care of the children has not been adversely affected since the consent order was made.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_48" id="Ftn_48_1"><sup>[note: 48]</sup></a></span> It saddens her that the Father has tried to weaponize her struggles against her, and at the expense of the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_49" id="Ftn_49_1"><sup>[note: 49]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_25"></a>25 The Mother says that she cannot imagine life without the children in her care. The thought of the Father taking the children away from her primary care is unfathomable for her. She is already dealing with various personal issues, and if what the Father wants is granted to him, she is afraid that her recovery path may be derailed, because she would be completely devasted.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_50" id="Ftn_50_1"><sup>[note: 50]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_26"></a>26 The Mother says that the Father’s attempts to discredit her ability to care for the children are based on bare allegations which are easily rebutted.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_51" id="Ftn_51_1"><sup>[note: 51]</sup></a></span> The events that the Father has presented are embellished stories which have no bearing on her ability to care for the children. For example, contrary to the Father’s allegations, she was not drinking alcohol at Restaurant X, but has anaemia which causes her to faint.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_52" id="Ftn_52_1"><sup>[note: 52]</sup></a></span> Furthermore, the Mother has always ensured that either she or a trusted adult figure would be looking after the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_53" id="Ftn_53_1"><sup>[note: 53]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_27"></a>27 The Mother disputes the Father’s allegations that she turned more hostile towards him<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_54" id="Ftn_54_1"><sup>[note: 54]</sup></a></span> and says that she is committed to raising the children to the best of her ability with the Father.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_55" id="Ftn_55_1"><sup>[note: 55]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_28"></a>28 The Mother says that the Father is not a suitable caregiver for the children.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_56" id="Ftn_56_1"><sup>[note: 56]</sup></a></span> There is serious doubt as to whether it would be good for the children to be in the Father’s care and control and to live with him and his partner on a daily basis. The Father would not have any trusted adult to help with the care of the children, and whom the children are used to. This would be a major upheaval for the children. <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_57" id="Ftn_57_1"><sup>[note: 57]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_29"></a>29 The Mother says that the Father is also financially irresponsible and was so tardy in his payment of his credit card payments that his credit line was reduced.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_58" id="Ftn_58_1"><sup>[note: 58]</sup></a></span> The Father is unable to provide the Mother with timely information in his travel plans with the children, which does not inspire confidence that the Father would be able to juggle all the many logistics of the children’s daily activities.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_59" id="Ftn_59_1"><sup>[note: 59]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_30"></a>30 The Mother says that she does not have an issue with the Father moving on in life, but does have a valid concern with the Father exposing the children to new romantic interests in his life.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_60" id="Ftn_60_1"><sup>[note: 60]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">Analysis</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Variation of care and control </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_31"></a>31 Section 128 of the Women’s Charter 1961 (2020 Rev Ed) (“WC”) provides as follows:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">The court may at any time vary or rescind any order for the custody, or the care and control, of a child on the application of any interested person, where it is satisfied that the order was based on any misrepresentation or mistake of fact or where there has been any <em>material change in the circumstances</em>.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">[emphasis added]</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_32"></a>32 In <em>DDN v DDO</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/30869-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGHC(A) 2</a>, the Appellate Division held as follows:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">16 … in determining whether a material change in circumstances exists for the purposes of s 128 of the WC, the court is required to balance several interests. This includes on the one hand, the need for stability in carrying out orders and establishing the post-divorce routine for the child over a reasonable period of time, and on the other, the need to be responsive to new developments. As to the former consideration, we recognise that it is not desirable for the parties and their children to be “in limbo”, where constant applications for variation result in uncertainty for the children and keeps the family in the “litigation box” even before there has been sufficient time for the new arrangements to be carried out or for routines to be set up. As to the latter consideration, we are cognisant that the parent-child relationship is dynamic, especially since children have new needs and preferences as they grow older. Thus, the court must also ensure that there is sufficient flexibility to adjust orders relating to the child’s arrangements to suit the current circumstances facing the child.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">17 The upshot of these competing interests is that while the court will take a wider and more holistic approach to assess what constitutes a material change in circumstances for issues involving a child, this should <em>not</em> encourage parties to pursue a variation of orders at the earliest opportunity. Instead, the court expects parties to do their utmost to make the ordered arrangements work. This perspective is crucial to ensuring that “the child’s interests are not side-lined while his or her parents litigate over what they subjectively perceive to be their respective rights and entitlements”: <em>TAU v TAT</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/SLR/22624-SSP.xml')">[2018] 5 SLR 1089</a> (“<em>TAU</em>”) (at [10]).</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_33"></a>33 As the present case involves the variation of a consent order, the observations of Choo Han Teck J in <em>VWQ v VWR</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27108-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGHCF 5</a> (“<em>VWG v VWR</em>”) (at [9]) also bear reiterating:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">Although the court has broad powers under ss 73, 119 and 129 of the Women’s Charter 1961 (2020 Rev Ed) to vary agreements on issues of custody and maintenance, such powers should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances (<em>AYM v AYL</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/SLR/[2013] 1 SLR 0924.xml')">[2013] 1 SLR 924</a>). Generally, a consent order is a contract negotiated and agreed upon by parties, and the courts would be slow to re-write their contract. Privately settled terms negotiated by the parties, especially in family matters are to be encouraged. As such, they should be respected, and not lightly changed. Otherwise, one party may lead the other to believe that obtaining a consent order would end their dispute, only to call in aid the provisions in the Women’s Charter to vary their agreement (<em>TOC v TOD</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/18950-SSP.xml')">[2016] SGHCF 10</a>) when they feel that the bargain was not to their liking subsequently.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_34"></a>34 Although the Mother’s position is that there is no material change in circumstances as the Father was aware of her struggle with alcohol even before the consent order was made, it is clear from a review of the evidence and the CER that the children are distressed and affected by her current condition.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_35"></a>35 While the court would be slow to re-write a consent order agreed upon by parties, there are concerns affecting the wellbeing of the children that need to be addressed. As noted above, the court will take a wider and more holistic approach to assess what constitutes a material change in circumstances for issues involving a child. The court must ensure that there is sufficient flexibility to adjust orders relating to the child’s arrangements to suit the current circumstances facing the child.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_36"></a>36 In the present case, both parents have deficits due to their alcoholism. As alcoholism is a life-long mental health concern that the parents will require addiction treatment and ongoing aftercare, the reality is that either parent could experience relapses, especially given the heightened stressors due to the variation applications. The difference is that the Father appears to have coped better. He is able to sustain employment and function daily. He is open about his challenges and has demonstrated a willingness to acknowledge his own failings and work on them.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_37"></a>37 In contrast, the Mother, unfortunately, does not seem to be coping well. She is unable to sustain employment and has stopped work since September 2021 on the advice of her doctors and therapists to focus on recovery from her mental health conditions.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_61" id="Ftn_61_1"><sup>[note: 61]</sup></a></span> The fragility of her mental state is worrying, as may be gathered from her insistence that she would be “completely devasted” if the Father is granted sole care and control of the children. She appears to lack insight and attunement to the children’s struggles and tends to focus on the Father’s deficits instead of taking accountability for her own.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_38"></a>38 While I empathise with both parents in the challenges they face, it is important for the parents to recognise that the children’s exposure to their alcoholism is a cause for concern as there is an impact on their current coping and future self.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_39"></a>39 I share some insights from the social science perspective. As noted in the CER, children in general need some structure and predictability. Their emotional and psychological wellbeing will benefit from a consistency of care for them to develop secure attachments. Unfortunately, when living with a parent with alcohol addiction, children tend to function in a survival mode as they have to tread carefully around the parent to avoid triggering the parent and to maintain peace. Additionally, children may become confused and potentially blame themselves when the alcoholic parent denies the addiction problem. Due to these experiences, children tend to be more rigid and inflexible, have anxiety, self-critical, have perfectionist traits, and hold back emotionally.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_40"></a>40 In the present case, there is an even greater need for the parents to be empathetic to the children’s struggles, given that both parents suffer from alcohol dependency issues.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_41"></a>41 In addition, the ongoing litigation has harmful effects on the children. In this regard, the following caution of Debbie Ong JAD in <em>WBU v WBT</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27460-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGHCF 9</a> (at [47]) bears reiterating:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">Litigation has harmful effects on the child – materially, because the family loses in incurring litigation expenses, and psychologically, because conflict affects the whole family in ways not easily visible …</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_42"></a>42 The parents need to rise above their own challenges and mitigate the stressors affecting the children.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_43"></a>43 As noted above, the Father presents as a functioning alcoholic. He is able to manage and attend to the children’s needs and has been proactive in engaging the school about the children’s coping and progress. The children cope better with the Father due to his mannerisms towards them and the stability that he offers. Although the Mother is the care and control parent, the children appear to rely on the Father for emotional support and safety.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_44"></a>44 As the Father is a stabilising presence in the lives of the children, he can provide support to the children by taking on greater responsibility in their care. Indeed, that is what the Father hopes to do. That said, I am mindful that a reversal of care and control would be too drastic and could deal a heavy blow to the Mother given her fragility. The children are worried about the Mother’s emotional and physical wellbeing and want her to get better. They care for the Mother and love her.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_45"></a>45 In my view, there is room for a more compassionate approach to be adopted – one that allows for the children’s needs to be addressed without discouraging the Mother and affecting her recovery. For this reason, I find that a shared care arrangement is preferrable to a reversal of care and control. Under a shared care arrangement, the Mother can take comfort in the fact that the care of the children is not “taken away” from her as she had feared. On the contrary, the children will benefit from the care given by both parents playing equal and complementary roles in their lives. The shared care arrangement is also consistent with the Mother’s commitment to raise the children to the best of her ability with the Father. The Mother will also have more time to focus on her recovery.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_46"></a>46 For these reasons, I ordered that the parents shall have joint custody and shared care and control of the children on the terms set out in [7] above. Additionally, as the parents and children can benefit from the mental health and therapeutic services provided by a mental health trained therapist under the POTS (Panel of Therapeutic Specialists) Programme, the parents were encouraged to consider entering into a consent order for this purpose so that a referral could be made.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Variation of maintenance</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_47"></a>47 I turn now to the children’s maintenance.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_48"></a>48 In <em>AYM v AYL</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/SLR/16670-SSP-M.xml')">[2014] 4 SLR 559</a>, the Court of Appeal noted as follows:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">15 In relation to variation of maintenance for children, the relevant provisions are in ss 72 and 73:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-2">Rescission and variation of order</p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <b>72.</b>—(1) On the application of any person receiving or ordered to pay a monthly allowance under this Part and on proof of a change in the circumstances of that person, his wife or child, or for other good cause being shown to the satisfaction of the court, the court by which the order was made may rescind the order or may vary it as it thinks fit.</p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2">(2) Without prejudice to the extent of the discretion conferred upon the court by subsection (1), the court may, in considering any application made under this section, take into consideration any change in the general cost of living which may have occurred between the date of the making of the order sought to be varied and the date of the hearing of the application.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-2">Power of court to vary agreement for maintenance of child</p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <b>73</b>. The court may, at any time and from time to time, vary the terms of any agreement relating to the maintenance of a child… notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in that agreement, where it is satisfied that it is reasonable and for the welfare of the child to do so.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">Although the parties did not cite these provisions in their respective cases or submissions before us, we thought that we should make clear the basis for varying the maintenance of the Children if that is what we are minded to do.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">16 Section 73 provides that any agreement relating to maintenance may be varied where the court is “satisfied that it is reasonable and for the welfare of the child to do so”. The parties did not address us at all on this requirement under s 73. But in our judgment, the provision is wide enough to encompass a material change in the circumstances of the parents as <em>a</em> basis for varying the maintenance for the child. Whether or not this should result in the maintenance actually being varied is of course a factual inquiry that depends on the circumstances of each case. In the present appeals before us, the parties addressed us solely on whether there were material changes in the circumstances. Nonetheless we also considered the provisions of s 73.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_49"></a>49 Sections 72 and 73, which fall under Part 8 of the Charter, are applicable to a maintenance order made under s 127(1) of the Charter by virtue of s 127(2).</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_50"></a>50 As noted in <em>VWG v VWR</em>, the court’s powers to vary agreements on maintenance should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_51"></a>51 The Father says that at the time of the consent order, the parties agreed to share the children’s reasonable monthly expenses equally. As the children’s monthly expenses amount to about S$16,000, they agreed that the Father shall pay the Mother half of this sum a month for the children’s maintenance. Although he initially made an offer to pay maintenance of S$7,000 for the children, they eventually agreed to the sum of S$8,500, and this is reflected in the consent order.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_62" id="Ftn_62_1"><sup>[note: 62]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_52"></a>52 The Mother says that the children’s school fees have been excluded from the children’s reasonable expenses since the consent order was made as her parents have been paying for that expense.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_63" id="Ftn_63_1"><sup>[note: 63]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_53"></a>53 This is disputed by the Father as follows:<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_64" id="Ftn_64_1"><sup>[note: 64]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">I am fully aware that the Plaintiff’s parents have been paying the children’s school fees directly at the Plaintiff’s instructions which is on all accounts, the Plaintiff’s prerogative, but this does not mean that I have not been contributing to the children’s school fees every month. I state that the existing maintenance sum of $8,500 includes provision for the children’s school fees and repeat the above.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_54"></a>54 The Mother says that her parents knew that the maintenance provided by the Father would be inadequate to maintain the standard of living which the children and the Mother were accustomed to and said that they would help pay for the children’s school fees if they live with her.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_65" id="Ftn_65_1"><sup>[note: 65]</sup></a></span> However, the Mother did not produce any affidavit from her parents to support her claim nor did she produce any other corroborative evidence to show that the school fees were excluded from the computation of the children’s monthly expenses at the time of the consent order. In the circumstances, I found it difficult to accept the Mother’s bare assertion. In my judgment, it is more likely that the existing maintenance sum of $8,500 includes provision for the children’s school fees as stated by the Father.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_55"></a>55 The Father says that the children’s monthly expenses and needs have not changed significantly since the IJ, and there should not be any revision to the quantum payable for their monthly maintenance moving forward.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_66" id="Ftn_66_1"><sup>[note: 66]</sup></a></span> He disagrees with the Mother’s assertion that the monthly expenses of the children have increased to the tune of S$21,000.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_67" id="Ftn_67_1"><sup>[note: 67]</sup></a></span> The Father says that if he were to have care and control of the children, the Mother shall pay the children’s monthly maintenance amount of $8,500 to him.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_68" id="Ftn_68_1"><sup>[note: 68]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_56"></a>56 Since the Father’s prayer for reversal of care and control is not granted, it follows that the Father’s prayer for the Mother to pay reasonable maintenance in the sum of $8,500 per month for the children must likewise be refused. While a downward adjustment to the quantum of the maintenance payable by the Father would have been warranted to take into account the fact that the children will now spend more time with the Father under the shared care arrangement, I note that the Mother has been unemployed since September 2021 on medical ground.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_57"></a>57 Balancing all factors, I found that it would be preferrable for the <em>status quo</em> to remain for now. Accordingly, I made no adjustment to the existing maintenance order.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_58"></a>58 Turning now to the Mother’s cross-application to increase the maintenance for the children, the Mother’s case is that at the time the consent order was made, she was working at Employer B and her gross monthly income in 2021 was $6,836.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_69" id="Ftn_69_1"><sup>[note: 69]</sup></a></span> In September 2021, she resigned from her job<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_70" id="Ftn_70_1"><sup>[note: 70]</sup></a></span> at the advice of her doctor<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_71" id="Ftn_71_1"><sup>[note: 71]</sup></a></span> and has not gone back to the workforce since then.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_72" id="Ftn_72_1"><sup>[note: 72]</sup></a></span> The Mother says that she no longer has an income or earning capacity.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_73" id="Ftn_73_1"><sup>[note: 73]</sup></a></span> This is a material change in circumstances which warrants the Mother asking for the Father to pay the bulk of the children’s expenses amounting to S$21,000 per month. <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_74" id="Ftn_74_1"><sup>[note: 74]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_59"></a>59 The Father says that while the Mother claims in her affidavit that she is unemployed and insinuates that she is unable to obtain employment due to her depression and alcohol abuse, she in fact has represented that she has always been employed.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_75" id="Ftn_75_1"><sup>[note: 75]</sup></a></span> The Father says that the Mother has failed to account for regular deposits to her DBS Multi Currency Autosave Account between the period February 2023 to May 2023, which suggests that she has undeclared sources of income.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_76" id="Ftn_76_1"><sup>[note: 76]</sup></a></span> The Father alleges that the Mother is seeking to hide her actual income earnings and the full extent of her wealth.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_77" id="Ftn_77_1"><sup>[note: 77]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_60"></a>60 The Father says further that the Mother’s doctor’s memo does not state that she is prevented from or unable to obtain other employment from her previous work at Employer B. Since being out of job in September 2021, the Mother has not shown any effort to obtain gainful employment.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_78" id="Ftn_78_1"><sup>[note: 78]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_61"></a>61 It is an established principle that the financial obligations of parents depend on their financial capacity. As noted in <em>WBU v WBT</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29255-SSP.xml')">[2023] SGHCF 3</a> (at [38]):</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">… financial capacity need not be rigidly ascertained by sole reference to income alone. Consistent with s 69(4)(b) of the Charter, the court should consider the parties’ “income, earning capacity (if any), property and other financial resources”, as well as significant liabilities and financial commitments. For instance, a party who earns no income but has substantial savings or had received substantial inheritance would well be able to afford to bear a higher burden of the maintenance obligation, if reasonable in the circumstances of the case. The court should also have regard to the assets received by parties after the division of their matrimonial assets.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_62"></a>62 As the Mother is seeking to vary the maintenance order, the burden of proving the existence of a material change in circumstances rests with her: see <em>AXM v AXO</em> [2014] 2 SLR 805 (at [31]). The Mother says that she no longer has an income or earning capacity, though this is disputed by the Father. However, even taking her case at its highest, I found that she has not discharged the burden of proof. As noted above, the financial capacity of a party is not rigidly ascertained by sole reference to income alone. The court is required to consider the party’s property and other financial resources. A party who earns no income may well have property and other financial resources that could meet his or her maintenance obligation. As the Mother has not provided any evidence of her property or other financial resources, there is no basis for the court to form an accurate assessment of her financial capacity that would warrant a variation. Accordingly, I made no order on her cross-application.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_63"></a>63 As neither party has succeeded fully and having regard also to the need to reduce acrimony, I made no order as to costs.</p> <hr align="left" size="1" width="33%"><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_1_1" id="Ftn_1">[note: 1]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [11].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_2_1" id="Ftn_2">[note: 2]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [15].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_3_1" id="Ftn_3">[note: 3]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [16].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_4_1" id="Ftn_4">[note: 4]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [6].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_5_1" id="Ftn_5">[note: 5]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [6].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_6_1" id="Ftn_6">[note: 6]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [12].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_7_1" id="Ftn_7">[note: 7]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [7].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_8_1" id="Ftn_8">[note: 8]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [5].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_9_1" id="Ftn_9">[note: 9]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [19].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_10_1" id="Ftn_10">[note: 10]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [20].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_11_1" id="Ftn_11">[note: 11]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [9(a)-(c)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_12_1" id="Ftn_12">[note: 12]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [9(g)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_13_1" id="Ftn_13">[note: 13]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [10].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_14_1" id="Ftn_14">[note: 14]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [11].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_15_1" id="Ftn_15">[note: 15]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [12].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_16_1" id="Ftn_16">[note: 16]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_17_1" id="Ftn_17">[note: 17]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(a)(i)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_18_1" id="Ftn_18">[note: 18]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(i)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_19_1" id="Ftn_19">[note: 19]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(f)(ii)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_20_1" id="Ftn_20">[note: 20]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(f)(iii)(1)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_21_1" id="Ftn_21">[note: 21]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(f)(iii)(5)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_22_1" id="Ftn_22">[note: 22]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [14(f)(iv)].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_23_1" id="Ftn_23">[note: 23]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [15].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_24_1" id="Ftn_24">[note: 24]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 1409) filed on 3 May 2023 (“DA1”) at [17].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_25_1" id="Ftn_25">[note: 25]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [128].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_26_1" id="Ftn_26">[note: 26]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [13].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_27_1" id="Ftn_27">[note: 27]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [15].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_28_1" id="Ftn_28">[note: 28]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [34].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_29_1" id="Ftn_29">[note: 29]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [35].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_30_1" id="Ftn_30">[note: 30]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [36].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_31_1" id="Ftn_31">[note: 31]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [31].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_32_1" id="Ftn_32">[note: 32]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [33].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_33_1" id="Ftn_33">[note: 33]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [37].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_34_1" id="Ftn_34">[note: 34]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [38].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_35_1" id="Ftn_35">[note: 35]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [38].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_36_1" id="Ftn_36">[note: 36]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [41].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_37_1" id="Ftn_37">[note: 37]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [43].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_38_1" id="Ftn_38">[note: 38]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [43].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_39_1" id="Ftn_39">[note: 39]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [44].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_40_1" id="Ftn_40">[note: 40]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [137].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_41_1" id="Ftn_41">[note: 41]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [46].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_42_1" id="Ftn_42">[note: 42]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [137].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_43_1" id="Ftn_43">[note: 43]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [45].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_44_1" id="Ftn_44">[note: 44]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [93].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_45_1" id="Ftn_45">[note: 45]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [117].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_46_1" id="Ftn_46">[note: 46]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [48].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_47_1" id="Ftn_47">[note: 47]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at p 180.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_48_1" id="Ftn_48">[note: 48]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [45].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_49_1" id="Ftn_49">[note: 49]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [137].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_50_1" id="Ftn_50">[note: 50]</a></sup>Mother’s Supplementary Affidavit (SUM 1409) filed on 31 August 2023 (“PA2”) at [19].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_51_1" id="Ftn_51">[note: 51]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [38].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_52_1" id="Ftn_52">[note: 52]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [52].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_53_1" id="Ftn_53">[note: 53]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [131].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_54_1" id="Ftn_54">[note: 54]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [86].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_55_1" id="Ftn_55">[note: 55]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [118].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_56_1" id="Ftn_56">[note: 56]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at (3) at p 49.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_57_1" id="Ftn_57">[note: 57]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [122].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_58_1" id="Ftn_58">[note: 58]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [134].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_59_1" id="Ftn_59">[note: 59]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [135].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_60_1" id="Ftn_60">[note: 60]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [121].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_61_1" id="Ftn_61">[note: 61]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 1409) filed on 30 June 2023 (“PA1”) at [128] & p 180.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_62_1" id="Ftn_62">[note: 62]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 2728) filed on 4 October 2023 (“DA4”) at [16].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_63_1" id="Ftn_63">[note: 63]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 2728) filed on 31 August 2023 (“PA3”) at [63].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_64_1" id="Ftn_64">[note: 64]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 2728) filed on 4 October 2023 (“DA4”) at [18].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_65_1" id="Ftn_65">[note: 65]</a></sup>Mother’s Affidavit in Support (SUM 2728) filed on 31 August 2023 (“PA3”) at [63].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_66_1" id="Ftn_66">[note: 66]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [32].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_67_1" id="Ftn_67">[note: 67]</a></sup>Father’s Affidavit in Reply (SUM 2728) filed on 4 October 2023 (“DA4”) at [19].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_68_1" id="Ftn_68">[note: 68]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [31].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_69_1" id="Ftn_69">[note: 69]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [94].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_70_1" id="Ftn_70">[note: 70]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [95].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_71_1" id="Ftn_71">[note: 71]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [97].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_72_1" id="Ftn_72">[note: 72]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [96].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_73_1" id="Ftn_73">[note: 73]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [113].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_74_1" id="Ftn_74">[note: 74]</a></sup>Mother’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [113].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_75_1" id="Ftn_75">[note: 75]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [33].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_76_1" id="Ftn_76">[note: 76]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [33].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_77_1" id="Ftn_77">[note: 77]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [33].</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_78_1" id="Ftn_78">[note: 78]</a></sup>Father’s Written Submissions dated 7 November 2023 at [38].</p></div></content></root> | 1312 |
Links from other tables
- 1 row from _item in fc_judgments_version