Judgment Header
ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152
Loading…
[2007] SGHC 152
General Division of the High Court of Singapore20 Sept 2007OS 1200/2006
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 3 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Later cases and laws citing this decision
“sing his assets and means is less likely to receive a favourable costs order (JBB at [33]). Costs may be ordered against parties who are found to have made patently unmeritorious allegations (ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152 at [24]). By the same token, those who are found to have incurred unnecessary costs will not be allowed”
“f my finding at [40] above were wrong and the Stevens Close Property were considered to be an entirely pre-marriage asset, the Husband’s submission would still be wrong as a matter of law. In ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152 (“ET”), Lee Seiu Kin J held that the income from rent or dividends received during the marriage are matr”
“I then considered the legal principles which applied to the assets in question. In the course of argument, the Wife cited the authority of ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152 (“ET v ES”), which ostensibly supported her argument that the dividends were “matrimonial assets” under s 112(10) that should be included in the pool. In ET”
Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Judgment Header
ET v ES [2007] SGHC 152
Case Metadata
Case No: OS 1200/2006
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2007-09-20
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.