Skip to content
laws.sgby aturio
Grounds publishedDecided 14 Jul 2015
Contents

High Court

ATZ v AUA

Feedback & support

[2015] SGHC 182Case no. Divorce Transferred No. 341 of 20124 paragraphs

What happened, in plain English

There is no plain-English summary of this judgment yet.

Ask about this judgment

Grounds of decision

Official text from eLitigation

  1. Belinda Ang Saw Ean J:

  2. [1] This judgment supplements my judgment in ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 released on 24 June 2015 (“June 2015 Judgment”), and I adopt the definitions which I have used there.

  3. [2] After the release of the June 2015 Judgment, Ms Loo informed the court in her letter of 26 June 2015 that the rental of the new accommodation at Villa Marina is $3,750 per month and not the figure of $3,150 as stated in [86] of the June 2015 Judgment. Ms Loo referred to the Tenancy Agreement dated 30 September 2014 for Villa Marina which she tendered without an accompanying affidavit during the hearing on 9 October 2014.

  4. [3] Mr Singh responded to Ms Loo’s letter on 9 July 2015. He confirmed that the current rent was $3,750 per month, and he agreed that this figure of $3,750 may be used for computation of maintenance.

  5. [4] In light of the above, and as the intention of the June 2015 Judgment is for the defendant to bear half of the rental of the accommodation that is near the child’s school, I now confirm and order that with effect from 1 July 2015, the plaintiff will receive a monthly sum of $3,375 as maintenance for the child, a breakdown of this figure is as follows:

  6. (a) $1,500 for the child’s maintenance; and

  7. (b) $1,875 being half share of the current rent of $3,750.