TTZ v TTY [2024] SGHCF 46

Outcome: Appeal Dismissed.

Facts

1     The mother has care and control of the parties’ teenage son and the father has access. The DJ found that the father’s persistent actions of triangulating the child in the parties’ conflict had contributed to the deterioration of the father and son relationship. 

2     The father also failed to prove that the mother was in breach of the conditions for the suspension of the committal order. The issue on appeal is whether there was breach of access orders by the mother on any of the occasions cited by the father. 

Court’s Decision:

3     As the criminal standard of proof is applicable, the burden is on the father to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the relevant conduct of the mother was intentional and that she knew of all the facts which would make such conduct a breach of the relevant order of court.: at [17].

4     In determining whether a parent is in breach of a court order to exercise all reasonable efforts to facilitate access, the court applies an objective test, taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, such as whether the parent against whom the order was made had acted in the best interests of the child, including the need of every child for love and care from both parents in order to grow up and achieve their fullest potential as balanced individuals.: at [20] and [45].

5     It must be borne in mind that a court order to exercise all reasonable efforts is not a stipulation for a guarantee that the court ordered outcome would indeed materialize.: at [20].

6     The court was not satisfied that appellate intervention was warranted. The father has failed to meet the threshold required to prove that the mother had failed to comply with the access terms, or that she did not exercise all reasonable efforts to compel the child to comply with the access terms on the 25 occasions that the father eventually relied on.: at [21] and [50].

7     The court found it appropriate, in addressing the father’s arguments, to set out in some detail, what transpired during the seven out of the 25 occasions when the child attended but refused to leave with the father. The court hoped that these observations would assist the father to reflect on how the way he interacted the child have caused further damage to their relationship, and to consider alternative approaches to communicating and parenting to pave the way for meaningful access to occur in future. In this connection, the court reviewed CCTV recordings of interactions between the father and child, finding that the father’s words were often caustic and hurtful, and his tone confrontational and intimidating, making the child uncomfortable and putting him on the defensive.: at [23] to [27].

8     While the mother’s messages were not couched in the most conducive language, they demonstrate that the mother was making repeated efforts to re-establish the relationship between the father and the child. Her advice to the father to put in the effort to contact the child more regularly and in a non-confrontational manner, treat the child with respect and establish a positive relationship with him, and to do it slowly, are hardly the words of a parent intentionally trying to alienate a child from the other parent.: at [39] to [40].

9     It is important for the judge to ascertain the root of the negative emotions that a child may have about one parent, and whether these originate from the children themselves based on their lived experience, or whether these originate from the influence of the other parent. It is in the latter situation that it may be appropriate for the judge to discount the child’s stated views in coming to a decision.: at [42].

10     The question of whether a parent with care and control has exercised all reasonable efforts to compel a child to comply with access terms is necessarily a fact-intensive inquiry. While the court can use the compulsion of law to order a parent to make all reasonable efforts to facilitate access, the court can do little in the realm of personal and emotional bonds between a parent and a child.: at [48].

11     The path ahead requires the parties to abandon approaches that have proven ineffective and instead adopt new ones that address the underlying issues rather than perpetuate entrenched positions. The objectives of therapeutic justice under the Family Justice Courts Therapeutic Justice Model include a focus on the resolution of the parties’ underlying issues in the long-term interests of the family and the children, putting the welfare of the children first.: at [52].

12     The court encouraged the father to seek professional assistance to explore how he can adopt a different approach to communications and parenting, and encouraged both parents to seek guidance on improving their communications with each other to minimize negative behaviors affecting the child's wellbeing.: at [52] to [53].

13     The court emphasized that relationships require consistent care, attention, and nourishment to flourish, and building a strong relationship with a child after marital dissolution requires each parent to prioritize nurturing their individual bond with the child.: at [54].