fc_judgments: 89
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 89 | 544b909ddeb79062af899c023af873a17f388125 | [
"Family Law \u2013 Costs"
] |
2024-10-01 | Family Court | Divorce No 1418 of 2011 (Summons No 2193 and 2194 of 2024) | XCL v XCM | [2024] SGFC 85 | 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%2F32273-SSP.xml | [
"VM Vidthiya (Victory Law Chambers LLC) for the plaintiff",
"The defendant in-person and unrepresented."
] |
2024-10-10T16:00:00Z[GMT] | Soh Kian Peng | <root><head><title>XCL v XCM</title></head><content><div class="contentsOfFile"> <h2 align="center" class="title"><span class="caseTitle"> XCL <em>v</em> XCM </span><br><span class="Citation offhyperlink"><a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/32273-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 85</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">Divorce No 1418 of 2011 (Summons No 2193 and 2194 of 2024)</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">01 October 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"> Soh Kian Peng </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"> VM Vidthiya (Victory Law Chambers LLC) for the plaintiff; The defendant in-person and unrepresented. </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"> XCL — XCM </td></tr></tbody></table> <p class="txt-body"><span style="font-style:italic">Family Law</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">Costs</span></p> <p></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td width="80%"><p class="Judg-Hearing-Date">1 October 2024</p></td><td><p class="Judg-Date-Reserved">Judgment reserved</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p> <p class="Judg-Author"> Assistant Registrar Soh Kian Peng:</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_1"></a>1 SUM 2194/2024 (“SUM 2194”) and SUM 2193/2024 (“SUM 2193”) was the Wife’s application for discovery and interrogatories respectively. I heard both summons and delivered judgment (see <em>XCL v XCM</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/32108-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 75</a>). This is my decision on costs.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_2"></a>2 The Wife is legally aided in these proceedings.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_1" id="Ftn_1_1"><sup>[note: 1]</sup></a></span> Ms VM Vidthiya (“Ms Vidthiya”) of Victory Law Chambers LLC has been assigned to represent her. The Husband, on the other hand, is self-represented.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_3"></a>3 Directions were given for parties to file their submissions on costs. To date, the Husband has not filed his submissions on costs despite having been reminded to do so.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_2" id="Ftn_2_1"><sup>[note: 2]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_4"></a>4 The Wife argues that costs should be fixed at $2000 (all-in) in respect of SUM 2194 which was her application for discovery.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_3" id="Ftn_3_1"><sup>[note: 3]</sup></a></span> In this vein, s 16 of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1995 is relevant. It stipulates that where a legally aided person is entitled to costs, the “aided person is entitled to the same costs as a person who is not an aided person”.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_5"></a>5 The Wife had succeeded in her application for discovery. She is therefore entitled to costs (see <em>WXG v WXH</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/31649-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 41</a>). Considering the circumstances of the case, namely that there was not a large number of items pursued in discovery, and that SUM 2194 did not involve any novel questions of law, I fix costs of SUM 2194 at $1500 (all-in). This sum shall be paid by the Husband to the Wife by 12 November 2024. I also order that the Wife, upon receipt of this sum from the Husband, make payment to the Director of Legal Aid as is required under s 16 of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1995 (see <em>XDF v XDG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/32215-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 82</a>).</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_6"></a>6 As for costs of SUM 2193, which was the Wife’s application for interrogatories, the Wife argues that although I had dismissed her application, there should be no order as to costs given that she was legally aided.<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_4" id="Ftn_4_1"><sup>[note: 4]</sup></a></span></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_7"></a>7 Here, s 14 of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1995 is relevant. It provides that costs may only be awarded against an aided person in the following two circumstances as set out in s 14(3) of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1995:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), the circumstances are as follows:</p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2">(a) the Grant of Aid issued to the aided person has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation;</p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2">(b) the aided person acted improperly in bringing or defending any legal proceedings, or in the conduct of those proceedings.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_8"></a>8 I find that neither of these two circumstances had been made out. First, there was no suggestion that the Grant of Aid had been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_9"></a>9 Second, although I had dismissed SUM 2193, this does not mean that the Wife had acted improperly in taking out her application for interrogatories. As Ms Vidthiya had explained during the hearing before me, the Wife had posed those interrogatories because she wanted to know “why the Husband had these debts”. She did not want a situation where the Husband “incur[red] debts and shirk[ed] his responsibility to provide for the children: <em>XCL v XCM</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/32108-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 75</a> at [18]. It was thus clear to me that the Wife had not unreasonably pursued her request for interrogatories: see <em>Anpex Pte Ltd v Cheng Yong Sun</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29042-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGHC 294</a> at [4].</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_10"></a>10 There shall therefore be no order as to costs for SUM 2193.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_11"></a>11 Finally, it remains for me to thank Ms Vidthiya for her able assistance.</p> <hr align="left" size="1" width="33%"><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_1_1" id="Ftn_1">[note: 1]</a></sup>Grant of Aid dated 3 May 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_2_1" id="Ftn_2">[note: 2]</a></sup>Registrar’s Notice dated 12 September 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_3_1" id="Ftn_3">[note: 3]</a></sup>Wife’s Submission on Costs at para 2(d).</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_4_1" id="Ftn_4">[note: 4]</a></sup>Wife’s Submission on Costs at para 3(b).</p></div></content></root> | 1816 |
Links from other tables
- 1 row from _item in fc_judgments_version