SINGAPORE: A family court has ordered a divorced man to pay maintenance for his five children, after his ex-wife filed an application saying he had neglected or refused to pay maintenance of S$500 (US$390) per child since June 2024.
The man had been paying his ex-wife monthly maintenance for the children, but gradually reduced what he paid since June 2024 to "prioritise personal savings for himself". He paid S$1,500 in total in September 2024 and thereafter only S$1,000 per month since October 2024.
In a judgment made available on Thursday (Sep 11), District Judge Maryam Hasanah Rozlan found that the father had neglected to provide reasonable maintenance for his five children and ordered that he pay S$2,085 in monthly maintenance for the five children from June 2024.
He is also to bear 69 per cent of the costs related to year-end school expenses such as schoolbooks, uniforms, water bottles and stationery for the children on a reimbursement basis, as well as 69 per cent of the costs related to expenses for medical-related bills.
The 69 per cent was derived from the net incomes of mother and father - with the father earning about S$5,100 a month as a traffic controller and the mother earning S$2,280 as a procurement officer. As the man earned 69 per cent of the total incomes of both parents, he was to bear 69 per cent of the above costs.
The man also has to pay other sums including a total annual sum of S$240 for the children for Hari Raya Puasa-related expenses, and a sum of S$9,265 as a lump sum in backdated maintenance for the period of September 2024 to June 2025.
Both parents are 36 and they were married for 13 years, bearing five children now aged 12, 10, eight, six and five.
They were divorced by the Syariah Court in January 2024 and they were given joint custody, with care and control of the children given to the mother while the father was provided with reasonable access to them.
The mother waived her claims to nafkah iddah - maintenance paid by the husband over three months after the divorce - and mutaah - a consolatory gift from a husband to the wife - in the divorce.
She received their matrimonial flat and both parties retained all other assets in their respective names.
After the divorce, the mother remarried and the children continued living with her in the flat while the father moved in with his parents and brother.
While he was given access to the children, he was not able to see them weekly due to his job, and saw them on average about three times a month.
The mother sought maintenance of S$500 per child, on top of S$350 per year for Hari Raya Puasa expenses at S$70 per child, a one-time reimbursement of S$4,000 for the youngest child's eczema treatment at a private clinic, and a one-time reimbursement of S$919.39 for 50 per cent of the fees incurred by the oldest child on a mobile phone application.
The mother claimed that the monthly expenses for five children came up to S$3,318 and that this sum should be divided among the parents based on their relative incomes.
She argued that the father was financially capable of providing S$2,500 per month for all five children.
The father, who was unrepresented, argued that S$1,000 per month was enough for the children based on his calculation that the mother required only S$500 for food and S$500 for miscellaneous expenses. Some of the children's school and education-related expenses, including school meals, were covered by financial assistance, he said.
He said the cost of the eczema treatment for their youngest child was "excessive" and treatment at a government-subsidised hospital would have sufficed.
As for the amount of S$1,838 incurred by their oldest child through the Google Play Store, the father said this was not the first time such an expense had been incurred.
Refunds were successfully obtained for previous transactions and he argued that he should not be responsible as the expenses had been incurred while the child was in the mother's care.
The judge found that the total expense of about S$8,800 incurred by the mother for the youngest child's private clinic eczema treatments were "excessive".
The oldest child's mobile phone expenses were "not reasonable" and "could have been avoided with closer supervision" of the child. The transactions had taken place from March to May in 2024 and neither parent explained why this was allowed to continue repeatedly, said the judge.
Given that the father generally had care of the children on Sundays, she found that he should be responsible only for the transactions incurred on one Sunday - which amounted to about S$265. The mother was to bear the remaining costs.
The judge assessed the children's reasonable monthly expenses to be S$615 for each of the children aged 12, 10 and eight, S$551 for the six-year-old and S$621 for the youngest child aged five.
The total expenses for the children come up to S$3,017 per month, with the father to bear S$2,085 or 69 per cent of this.
The judge also assessed the father's reasonable monthly expenses, which he estimated to be about S$3,000.
In the judge's assessment, his reasonable monthly expenses should amount to only about S$1,190. Among other things, she deducted S$800 he said he set aside as allowance for his parents, saying this was not a necessary expense and should not be prioritised over the children's maintenance.
His focus ought to be on supporting his children, said the judge.
She also adjusted his S$100 budget for cigarettes by half, saying they were not a necessity although he said he "required cigarettes to concentrate at work".
The judge also revised his projected savings sum of S$700 a month to zero. The father said he needed savings to secure a place of his own, since he had agreed for the flat to be transferred to the mother without any cash or Central Provident Fund consideration.
The judge said savings are not a necessary expense and should not be prioritised over the children's maintenance, adding again that the father's focus should be on supporting his children.
Continue reading...
The man had been paying his ex-wife monthly maintenance for the children, but gradually reduced what he paid since June 2024 to "prioritise personal savings for himself". He paid S$1,500 in total in September 2024 and thereafter only S$1,000 per month since October 2024.
In a judgment made available on Thursday (Sep 11), District Judge Maryam Hasanah Rozlan found that the father had neglected to provide reasonable maintenance for his five children and ordered that he pay S$2,085 in monthly maintenance for the five children from June 2024.
He is also to bear 69 per cent of the costs related to year-end school expenses such as schoolbooks, uniforms, water bottles and stationery for the children on a reimbursement basis, as well as 69 per cent of the costs related to expenses for medical-related bills.
The 69 per cent was derived from the net incomes of mother and father - with the father earning about S$5,100 a month as a traffic controller and the mother earning S$2,280 as a procurement officer. As the man earned 69 per cent of the total incomes of both parents, he was to bear 69 per cent of the above costs.
The man also has to pay other sums including a total annual sum of S$240 for the children for Hari Raya Puasa-related expenses, and a sum of S$9,265 as a lump sum in backdated maintenance for the period of September 2024 to June 2025.
THE CASE
Both parents are 36 and they were married for 13 years, bearing five children now aged 12, 10, eight, six and five.
They were divorced by the Syariah Court in January 2024 and they were given joint custody, with care and control of the children given to the mother while the father was provided with reasonable access to them.
The mother waived her claims to nafkah iddah - maintenance paid by the husband over three months after the divorce - and mutaah - a consolatory gift from a husband to the wife - in the divorce.
She received their matrimonial flat and both parties retained all other assets in their respective names.
After the divorce, the mother remarried and the children continued living with her in the flat while the father moved in with his parents and brother.
While he was given access to the children, he was not able to see them weekly due to his job, and saw them on average about three times a month.
SUMS SOUGHT BY THE MOTHER
The mother sought maintenance of S$500 per child, on top of S$350 per year for Hari Raya Puasa expenses at S$70 per child, a one-time reimbursement of S$4,000 for the youngest child's eczema treatment at a private clinic, and a one-time reimbursement of S$919.39 for 50 per cent of the fees incurred by the oldest child on a mobile phone application.
The mother claimed that the monthly expenses for five children came up to S$3,318 and that this sum should be divided among the parents based on their relative incomes.
She argued that the father was financially capable of providing S$2,500 per month for all five children.
The father, who was unrepresented, argued that S$1,000 per month was enough for the children based on his calculation that the mother required only S$500 for food and S$500 for miscellaneous expenses. Some of the children's school and education-related expenses, including school meals, were covered by financial assistance, he said.
He said the cost of the eczema treatment for their youngest child was "excessive" and treatment at a government-subsidised hospital would have sufficed.
As for the amount of S$1,838 incurred by their oldest child through the Google Play Store, the father said this was not the first time such an expense had been incurred.
Refunds were successfully obtained for previous transactions and he argued that he should not be responsible as the expenses had been incurred while the child was in the mother's care.
JUDGE'S FINDINGS
The judge found that the total expense of about S$8,800 incurred by the mother for the youngest child's private clinic eczema treatments were "excessive".
The oldest child's mobile phone expenses were "not reasonable" and "could have been avoided with closer supervision" of the child. The transactions had taken place from March to May in 2024 and neither parent explained why this was allowed to continue repeatedly, said the judge.
Given that the father generally had care of the children on Sundays, she found that he should be responsible only for the transactions incurred on one Sunday - which amounted to about S$265. The mother was to bear the remaining costs.
The judge assessed the children's reasonable monthly expenses to be S$615 for each of the children aged 12, 10 and eight, S$551 for the six-year-old and S$621 for the youngest child aged five.
The total expenses for the children come up to S$3,017 per month, with the father to bear S$2,085 or 69 per cent of this.
The judge also assessed the father's reasonable monthly expenses, which he estimated to be about S$3,000.
In the judge's assessment, his reasonable monthly expenses should amount to only about S$1,190. Among other things, she deducted S$800 he said he set aside as allowance for his parents, saying this was not a necessary expense and should not be prioritised over the children's maintenance.
His focus ought to be on supporting his children, said the judge.
She also adjusted his S$100 budget for cigarettes by half, saying they were not a necessity although he said he "required cigarettes to concentrate at work".
The judge also revised his projected savings sum of S$700 a month to zero. The father said he needed savings to secure a place of his own, since he had agreed for the flat to be transferred to the mother without any cash or Central Provident Fund consideration.
The judge said savings are not a necessary expense and should not be prioritised over the children's maintenance, adding again that the father's focus should be on supporting his children.
Continue reading...