[2015] SGHC 161

“The Judge’s decision is reported as ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 (“the Judgment”). This was accompanied by a short supplemental judgment (reported as ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 182 (“the Supplemental Judgment”)), which made a minor correction to the order for maintenan”

“I also noted that Emma has a fixed schooling routine, and would commence primary school later in the year. The High Court in ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 (at [109]) had remarked that a shared care and control arrangement may not be practical when a child commences formal education. In that case, the Court found that:”

“A useful illustration of the broad powers of the AM court is found in ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 (“ATZ v AUA”), though set in the context of custody and care and control orders. In that case, the parties had both applied for sole custody and care and control of their child under the Guardianship”

“was hoped, and that S will start formal primary school education in 2027. It has been recognised that a shared C&C arrangement may not be practical once a child commences formal education (ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 at [107]). Among other concerns, it would be impractical to require S to keep duplicate sets of school ma”

“January 2020, the Swedish court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the child maintenance application but this was “not related to the case concerning marriage”. The DJ took the view that ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 (“ATZ v AUA”) did not apply in the present case. While there were competing child maintenance orders in”