Judgment Header
AQS v AQR [2012] SGCA 3
Court DecisionSGCA
[2012] SGCA 3
[2012] SGCA 3
Court of Appeal of Singapore12 Jan 2012Civil Appeal No 19 of 2011
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 4 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
4Later cases and laws citing this decision
“nts of misconduct against each other, the court should not too readily sift through the facts and evidence in order to assign relative blame for the purposes of dividing matrimonial assets (AQS v AQR [2012] SGCA 3 at [39]). In my view, there is no basis for a negative contribution to be ascribed to the Wife. The bulk o”
“possible that the parties continue to contribute actively as homemaker and caretaker even in the presence of domestic help. This is consistent with the view taken by the Court of Appeal in AQS v AQR [2012] SGCA 3 where it stated at [40] that:”
“In coming to my decision, I considered various precedents cited by counsel. Counsel cited both AQS v AQR [2012] SGCA 3 (“AQS v AQR”) and Twiss in submissions. Neither of these cases was exactly on point. In AQS, the wife had no financial contribution and was purely a homemaker. Twiss concerned a much longer marriage”
“In AQS v AQR [2012] SGCA 3, the husband (but not the wife) had signed a memorandum in the following terms:”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Civil Appeal No 19 of 2011
Case Metadata
Court: Court of Appeal of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2012-01-12
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.