sg-crest A Singapore Government Agency Website
Official website links end with
Secure websites use HTTPS
Look for a lock () or https:// as an added precaution. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

VGY v VGZ [2020] SGHCF 6

Outcome: Appeal dismissed.  


1            In the midst of Ancillary Matters proceedings, the Wife had successfully applied to strike out certain portions of the Husband’s Affidavit of Assets and Means which was more than a hundred pages long. The Husband appealed.

Court’s Decision:

2            The court highlighted that parties should assist the court to reach a just decision, and not inundate and distract the court and parties with voluminous amounts of material that are not relevant to the issues before the court. In extreme situations where the court’s time and resources have been wasted in a wholly disproportionate manner, a party may face sanctions in the form of the appropriate cost orders: at [10] and [11].

4            The court further emphasised that family law in Singapore has adopted the “no fault” divorce regime. This regime recognises that it is not helpful for parties to allege the worst of each other when what they should seek to do is to address the consequences of the marriage breakdown, heal from them and move forward positively. It also recognises that marriage is an intimate relationship where alleged “faults” are not always easy to ascertain, especially when spouses had a continuous dynamic relationship during marriage in which how one spouse acts may impact how the other acts or reacts: at [15].

5            It is observed that Ancillary Matters proceedings are not the forum for parties to vent their frustrations. The parties are to address the financial consequences of their marriage breakdown in the present court proceedings, where the focus ought to be on the relevant issues in the division of assets and maintenance. Parties should use therapeutic services to support them in respect of the emotional consequences of marriage break down: at [16].

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.

Subject Matters: Procedural applications

Share this page: