My email dated Apr 22, 2013 to Prof. Leong Wai Kum regarding a fundamental misunderstnading about the family law in Singapore

 

Attachment: Entitlement v the interest of the union

 

From: yan jun
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:49 PM
To: lawlwk@nus.edu.sg
Subject: Concerns about "Elements of family law in Singapore 2013"

 

Dear Prof. Leong,

 

I appreciate all your work on family law. However, I am a little bit worried about the theories used to award the maintenance to the wife during marriage in your book “Elements of Family in Law in Singapore (2^nd Edition, 2013, or Elements 2013)”. With due respect, I would consider the reasoning faulty because the theories used for divorce cannot be used during the course of marriage due to the changes in the spouses duties and rights.

 

The Elements 2013 sees the husband’s duty to maintain his wife during marriage as a liability, which means a wife is entitled to apply to the Court for maintenance. This is wrong as analyzed in an online essay. The other widely accepted belief is that the wife’s misconduct cannot be used as defense, as discussed in the judgment by learned Magistrate Deniel Koh in famous Palvit Singh v Sawaran Singh [1990] 1 MLJ lvii.

 

In my opinion, the problem can be traced in the landmark paper published 25 years back that “Surely if a man may be ordered to maintain his wife despite the fact that she misconducted herself during the course of the marriage there is all the more reason to make him maintain her while she is still his wife” (29 Malaya Law. Rev. 56 (1987) at page 62).

 

The spouses have completely different rights and duties during their marriage and after its termination. By common sense, a former husband needs to provide maintenance to his needy ex-wife living with a new partner; however, there is no way for a husband to provide maintenance to his wife living with a third party as his duty is to “safeguard the interests of the union” and to prevent his wife from cohabitating with others. If a husband provided maintain to his misbehaved wife during marriage, he would further act against “the interests of the union” set by s46(1). Please find the attached for more details.

 

Thank you very much for your consideration. I am looking forward to hearing from you soon. If possible, I would appreciate it I have a chance to talk in person to you or your assistant about my concerns at your earliest convenience on Bukit Timah campus.

 

Regards,

Yan Jun

(An alumnus of NUS)

 

***DISCLAIMER*** The sender of this email is an alumnus of National University of Singapore (NUS). Kindly note that NUS is not responsible for the contents of this email, and views and opinions expressed are solely the sender's.