Back
2021 MarsdenLR 3292
SYARIAH APPEAL BOARD SINGAPORE
DP – Appellant
Versus
DQ – Respondent
[Appeal No: 38 Of 2019]
In divorce cases under Muslim law, child welfare is paramount, and maintenance obligations must align with the parties' financial abilities.
Headnote:(A) Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) - Sections 35(2)(e), 46B(3), 51(2) - Divorce proceedings initiated by the Husband citing failure of the Wife to fulfill marital duties; the Wife counters with claims of abuse and neglect of obligations - Court decrees divorce and outlines maintenance and custody arrangements - Joint custody awarded with care to the Wife, supervised access for the Husband. (Paras 1-4, 10, 21-28, 57)
(B) Custody - The best interest and welfare of the child is paramount; both parents share responsibility despite separation - Joint custody granted, Mother awarded care and control considering the child's age and welfare. (Paras 21-23)
(C) Nafkah Iddah and Mutaah - Husband ordered to provide maintenance according to his financial capabilities; Wife entitled to a reasonable payment under Islamic law. (Paras 34-41)
(D) The court emphasizes the need for post-divorce cooperation for child support and the importance of finding personal peace after divorce. (Paras 57, 58)
JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] This was a case where the plaintiff-husband filed for divorce on the grounds that the wife had failed to care for his needs and well-being as a husband. She left the matrimonial home without his consent since November 2017 together with their only child. This happened despite the husband stating that he never failed to provide nafkah both zahir and batin. Despite much persuasion for the wife to return home, she still refused to do so. At the same time, access to the child was made difficult. The husband also mentioned the wife's unreasonable character of bringing up his past mistakes, constantly finding fault with the husband's parents and accusing them of being intrusive. Due to that, the husband stated in his Amended Case Statement ("ACS") that there was no more love in their marriage, which necessitated him applying for the divorce.
[2] On the other hand, the wife made a counterclaim that the husband was the one who is the cause of the breakdown by failing to fulfil his marital obligation as a husband; being an abusive husband; having improper conduct with other women during marriage; making no effort to find any solution addressing the marital differences; and acting unreasonably by placing his family over the wife and the child.
[3] The contested ancillary issues were nafkah iddah, mutaah, child custody and the wife claiming for a share of the husband's other matrimonial assets in the form of Central Provident Fund ("CPF") moneys, savings, shares, insurance and investments. The Defendant wife was also seeking for her wedding gifts to be returned to her. On 9 December 2019 I made the following orders:
DECREE
UPON THE APPLICATION of the Plaintiff AND UPON READING the affidavits filed herein AND UPON HEARING Ms Mumtaj Banu, Counsel for the Plaintiff and Mr Mohammed Lutfi Bin Hussin, Counsel for the Defendant and the Plaintiff and the Defendant present, IT IS HEREBY DECREED THAT:
1. The marriage registered on the 22nd day of July 2016 be dissolved by the Plaintiffs pronouncement of talak on the 9th day of December 2019 as follows: 'I divorce my wife, [DP] with one talak'.
2. The Court confirms the pronouncement of divorce and decrees a divorce by 1 talak raji'i (1st talak) and orders that the divorce be registered (vide: divorce certificate number [redacted]).
3. The Plaintiff shall pay the divorce registration fee.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT:
4. The Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant nafkah iddah in the sum of $500.00 per month for 3 months.
5. The Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant mutaah in the sum of $300.00 per month for 25 months.
6. Payment of nafkah iddah followed by mutaah shall be deposited into the Defendant's POSB account no. [xxx] with effect from the 31" day of January 2020.
7(a). The Plaintiff and the Defendant shall have joint custody of the child: [B] (Male) born [date redacted] [NRIC No redacted],
(b). The Defendant shall have care and control of the child.
(c). The Plaintiff shall have access as follows:
i. 1 month supervised access, during weekends, either Saturday or Sunday, from 11.00am to 2.00pm;
ii. 3 months day access, every Tuesday and Thursday, from 6.00pm to 8.00pm and weekends, on either Saturday or Sunday, from 11.00am to 6.00pm;
iii. Thereafter, 2 days weekdays from 6.00pm to 8.00pm and alternate weekend overnight access, either from Friday 6.00pm to Saturday 8.00pm or Saturday, 11.00am to Sunday, 6.00pm;
iv. Hari Raya Puasa and Hari Raya Haji from the eve, 8.00pm to the following day, 2.00pm;
v. Alternate Public Holiday, from the eve, 8.00pm to the following day, 6.00pm;
vi. Half of the school holidays when the child has started schooling.
8. No order on the other claims
Dated this 9th day of December 2019
[4] The ex-wife appealed against all my orders I now set out below the reasons for my decision. For convenience, I shall refer to the plaintiff as "the Wife" and the defendant as "the Husband".
Background
[5] Parties were married on 22 July 2016 and have one child
