AYM v AYL: Variation of Consent Order for Maintenance and Division of Matrimonial Assets

In the divorce case of AYM v AYL, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard appeals regarding the variation of a consent order concerning maintenance payments and the division of matrimonial assets. The Wife had filed for divorce on 8 April 2010, and a consent order was entered on 13 July 2010. The Husband sought to reduce maintenance payments due to a failed business venture and an unexpected windfall from the sale of the matrimonial property. The Wife sought a lump sum payment. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, reducing the lump sum maintenance payment to $690,000, apportioned as $100,000 for the Wife and $590,000 for the Children.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed in Part

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Divorce case concerning the variation of a consent order for maintenance and division of matrimonial assets. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, reducing the lump sum maintenance.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
AYLRespondentOtherAppeal Allowed in PartPartial
AYMAppellantIndividualAppeal Allowed in PartPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sundaresh MenonChief JusticeYes
Andrew Phang Boon LeongJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Judith PrakashJudgeNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Kee Lay LianRajah & Tann LLP
Nigel PereiraRajah & Tann LLP
Vithiya RajendraRajah & Tann LLP
Wong Hui MinAnn Tan & Associates
Anamah TanAnn Tan & Associates

4. Facts

  1. The Husband and Wife were married for over 20 years and have three children.
  2. The Wife filed for divorce on 8 April 2010.
  3. A Consent Order was entered on 13 July 2010 regarding custody, maintenance, and division of assets.
  4. The Husband's business venture failed after the Consent Order was entered.
  5. The Matrimonial Property was sold for $5.1m, higher than the parties' expectations.
  6. The Wife and Children relocated to Sydney, Australia in January 2012.
  7. The Husband remarried and lives in Singapore with his new wife and her children.

5. Formal Citations

  1. AYM v AYL and another appeal, Civil Appeal Nos 116 of 2013 and 20 of 2014, [2014] SGCA 46
  2. AYL v AYM, , [2013] SGHC 237
  3. AYL v AYM, , [2012] SGHC 64
  4. AYM v AYL, , [2013] 1 SLR 924

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Wife filed for divorce
Consent Order recorded as part of interim judgment
Husband brought an application to vary the terms of the Consent Order
Wife and Children relocated to Sydney, Australia
Judge ordered lump sum maintenance payments
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Variation of Consent Order
    • Outcome: The Court of Appeal held that there was a material change in circumstances due to the higher sale proceeds from the matrimonial property, justifying a reduction in the agreed quantum of maintenance. The court also held that a lump sum payment was appropriate.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Material change in circumstances
      • Lump sum payment vs periodic payments
      • Financial capacity of husband

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Variation of Maintenance Order
  2. Lump Sum Maintenance Payment

9. Cause of Actions

  • Divorce
  • Variation of Consent Order

10. Practice Areas

  • Divorce
  • Family Law
  • Matrimonial Law

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
AYL v AYMHigh CourtYes[2013] SGHC 237SingaporeAppeal from this decision.
AYL v AYMHigh CourtYes[2012] SGHC 64SingaporeCited for facts of the case.
AYM v AYLCourt of AppealYes[2013] 1 SLR 924SingaporeCited for facts of the case.
Lee Puey Hwa v Tay Cheow SengCourt of AppealYes[1991] 2 SLR(R) 196SingaporeCited for the principle that a lump sum payment allows for a clean break in the marriage and should be availed of whenever feasible and that a lump sum payment should not be ordered if it would cripple the husband financially.
Wan Lai Cheng v Quek Seow Kee and another appeal and another matterCourt of AppealYes[2012] 4 SLR 405SingaporeCited for the principle that a clean break may help avoid further litigation and acrimony between the parties.
Neo Mei Lan Helena v Long Melvin AnthonyHigh CourtYes[2002] 2 SLR(R) 616SingaporeCited for the principle that a lump sum payment should not be ordered if it would cripple the husband financially and that a lump sum payment is appropriate where there is reason to believe that defaults in payments may be likely.
BCS v BCTDistrict CourtYes[2012] SGDC 338SingaporeCited for the principle that a lump sum payment is appropriate where there is reason to believe that defaults in payments may be likely.
Chua Chwee Thiam v Lim AnnieHigh CourtYes[1989] 1 SLR(R) 426SingaporeCited for the principle that a material adverse change in the financial circumstances of the Husband, especially where the Wife is reasonably provided for, is a good basis for a downward variation of a maintenance order.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) Section 118Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) Section 119Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) Section 72Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) Section 73Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Consent Order
  • Maintenance
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Lump Sum Payment
  • Periodic Payments
  • Material Change in Circumstances
  • Windfall
  • Clean Break

15.2 Keywords

  • divorce
  • family law
  • maintenance
  • consent order
  • matrimonial assets
  • lump sum
  • variation

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Maintenance95
Family Law90
Divorce90
Matrimonial Assets90
Division of Assets90
Children's Welfare80
Civil Procedure30
Measure of Damages30
Evidence30
Contract Law20
Estoppel10
Summary Judgement10
Trust Law10

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Matrimonial Assets
  • Maintenance