TWM v TWN [2021] SGHCF 25

Outcome: Appeal dismissed.  

Facts

1              The Husband appealed against the decision by the District Judge in relation to, amongst others, the care and control of the children. The Husband argued that the District Judge failed to consider the express the wishes of the children, and ought to have interviewed the children, and not just rely on the Child Representative’s Report.   

Court’s Decision:

2              The judicial interview of children is an important option in our judge-led family justice system. It is within the judge’s discretion to decide whether such an interview should be conducted, taking into account the advantages as well as limitations of judicial interview. Ultimately, the judge decides how best to ascertain the views and wishes of the children, and the judge is under no duty to interview the children. It is not for counsel to assert that the judge ought to have conducted an interview: at [14].  

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.