Judgment Header
WX v WW [2009] SGHC 70
Court DecisionSGHC
[2009] SGHC 70
[2009] SGHC 70
General Division of the High Court of Singapore25 Mar 2009DA 3/2008
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 2 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
2Later cases and laws citing this decision
“is fatal to her application for that order. Section 114(1) of the EA does not give rise to a rebuttable presumption that the Child is the biological child of M. As the High Court observed in WX v WW [2009] SGHC 70, [2009] 3 SLR(R) 573 at [11], section 114(1) of the EA is a presumption of legitimacy (i.e. a presumption”
“ng the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and that man) in s 114 of the Evidence Act 1893 (2020 Rev Ed) did not preclude maintenance being ordered against a biological father (WX v WW [2009] SGHC 70 (“WX v WW”) at [11]–[17]). In any case, as ss 68 and 69 of the Women’s Charter 1961 (2020 Rev Ed) (“Women”
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: DA 3/2008
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2009-03-25
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Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.