← All Authorities
Singapore uncategorised

UJF v UJG

[2019] SGCA 24
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2019
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Singapore Court of Appeal declined to adopt the Payne v Payne approach for relocation applications, holding that a holistic assessment of the child's best interests is paramount.

Key Principle

relocation application; welfare of child paramount; Payne v Payne approach not adopted; holistic assessment of child's best interests

Area of Law

family

Related Cases

Masson v Parsons (2019) 266 CLR 554

A known sperm donor may be recognised as a legal parent under the Family Law Act 1975, overriding inconsistent State presumptions, with paramount consideration given to the best interests of the child.

Stanford v Stanford (2012) 247 CLR 108
Stanford v Stanford (Just and Equitable Threshold) [2012] HCA 52

A property settlement order under s.79 FLA may only be made if it is just and equitable to alter existing property interests, which must be determined as a threshold question.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of UJF v UJG and how it applies to your situation.

Explain UJF v UJG