Company director and jobless ex-husband argue over assets worth $7.8m in divorce
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 01 Jul 2024
Author: Samuel Devaraj
The couple argued over the distribution of their matrimonial assets that included proceeds from the $6.2 million sale of their house in 2022.
Following a marriage of over 30 years, a woman who earns $32,500 monthly and her unemployed husband filed for divorce.
The couple, who have three children aged 25, 30, and 33, argued over the distribution of their matrimonial assets that included proceeds from the $6.2 million sale of their house in 2022.
The man, 64, claimed 50 per cent of the assets that were determined to be worth $7.8 million.
He said while his former wife, the director of a company, had been the sole breadwinner, he was the primary homemaker.
The woman, 62, argued for an 80 per cent share for herself.
She claimed that although her former husband had been unemployed since 1997, he had dabbled in various business undertakings over the years. She argued he was often busy and that taking care of the children was never his primary role.
In a judgment dated June 24, Justice Teh Hwee Hwee awarded the woman 60 per cent of the assets, while the man got 40 per cent.
She took into account the extent of each person’s contribution in terms of money and property, and looking after the welfare of the family.
The judge found the woman had been involved in caring for the children and the household even as she worked full-time and had provided for the financial needs of the whole family for about 25 years.
Justice Teh said the man, in addition to caring for the family and the children, had contributed financially in the early years of the marriage when he was working.
This included buying their first home, which then allowed them to grow their matrimonial assets.
The judgment did not state why they had divorced.
But it noted the channel of communications between them deteriorated as their relationship worsened, and they had been living apart for at least four years before filing for divorce.
About nine years into their marriage in 1988, the man left his full-time banking job.
He then ran a home-delivery laundry service for a year, operated a fried noodles hawker stall for two months, and conducted ad-hoc financial futures and options markets classes for free at home for four years.
He also was an ad hoc guest speaker in Malaysia on financial markets for six years from 2012, receiving an honorarium of RM200 (S$57.50) to RM300 each time.
Claiming her ex-husband was not a house husband, the woman said he had to attend to his business and travel to Malaysia for work. The family also had domestic helpers.
She argued that apart from being the sole breadwinner of the family and being responsible for all household expenses, she had also made significant non-financial contributions.
These included doing household chores, grocery shopping, overseeing renovations, planning family trips and fixing household appliances. She also said she was the children’s primary caregiver.
The couple’s second and third children, their son, 30, and daughter, 25, provided evidence of their mother being a strong, reliable, available and attentive parent, who was an ever-present source of comfort for them.
According to the judgment, the daughter detailed with fondness the time she spent with her mother and the quiet ways through which she had shown her affection.
Justice Teh noted: “She has described the wife as the ‘glue’ holding the family together, and is deeply appreciative to her mother for always making time for her and her siblings despite having to work full-time.”
The three children had also given evidence on their father’s contributions as the primary homemaker, which supported his arguments.
They recounted how their father was by their side, not only when they were injured or sick, but also when they needed guidance, support or help.
They also described him as a father who had been available and who had taken care of their well-being.
Justice Teh said the couple had been successful parents.
She said: “These are parents who have resourced their children, and provided them with a loving and stable environment while growing up.
“This could only have been achieved by both parties’ contributions in the economic and homemaking spheres.
“I hope that the parties and their children can work towards finding common ground to heal, and to support one another in that process as they step into the future.”
Source: Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
767