Tan Hwee Lee v Tan Cheng Guan and another appeal and another matter [2012] SGCA 50

Outcome: Appeal allowed in part. 

Facts

1 Both the Wife and Husband appealed against the decision of the High Court judge (the “Judge”) with regard to the division of matrimonial assets and the order of maintenance. The main issue on appeal is whether an inter-spousal gift is a matrimonial asset for the purposes of s 112(10) of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) (the “Act”).  

Court’s Decision:

2 The Court of Appeal dismissed the Wife’s appeal that an inter-spousal gift does not constitute a matrimonial asset and/or than an exception to the general rule than an inter-spousal gift constitutes a matrimonial asset applies in the present case: at [67]. 

3 The general rule is that inter-spousal gifts of assets which do not originate from a third-party gift or inheritance are not “gifts” for the purposes of s 112(10) of the Act, and should therefore constitute matrimonial assets for division. The only exception is where the gift is of no substantial value. In the nature of things, such gifts would tend to be highly personal in nature. Whether or not a gift is of no substantial value would depend very much on the precise factual matrix before the court: at [30], [48] and [49]. 

3 Whilst an inter-spousal gift should not be excluded from the pool of matrimonial assets, the nature and context of the gift could be taken into consideration at the second stage when the court decides on a “just and equitable” division between the parties. The Act provides a helpful list of matters that the court should consider in this exercise, but the list is not exhaustive: at [39]. 

4 In situations when it would be clearly inequitable for a donor spouse to be awarded a substantial share in the asset constituting the inter-spousal gift (or in the form of other assets), the court can take such a situation into consideration under s 112(1) of the Act and award the donee spouse a greater percentage of the overall matrimonial assets: at [41].

The full text of the decision can be found here.

This summary is provided to assist the public to have a better understanding of the Court’s judgment. It is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court. All numbers in bold font and square brackets refer to the corresponding paragraph numbers in the Court’s judgment.