YBG v YBH

YBG v YBH

The Husband failed to prove any actionable misrepresentation: allegations were insufficiently particularised, lacked contemporaneous or witness evidence, and were inconsistent with his own solicitors’ correspondence and conduct (including attempts to renegotiate and extensive delay). Section 118 applies but the elements of fraudulent misrepresentation were not satisfied on the requisite cogent balance of probabilities. Accordingly OADV 709 (rescission) is dismissed and the Maintenance Order stands; enforcement under s71 succeeds and arrears of S$68,000 are ordered payable in instalments with specified show-payment conditions and a short default imprisonment term.

Citation
[2026] SGFC 50
Parties
Applicant (husband): YBG; Respondent (wife): YBH
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
7 April 2026
Case Number
FC/OADV 709/2025
Procedural Posture
Family Court Ancillary Proceedings Arising From Divorce (originating Application to Vary/reciss and Maintenance Summons) / Trial on Enforcement Summons and Oral Hearing of Rescission Application (combined Hearing)
Outcome
OADV 709 dismissed; MSS 1726 allowed in part (enforcement of maintenance order granted)
Legal Topics
Consent Orders, Rescission of Orders for Misrepresentation, Maintenance Enforcement, Section 118 Women’s Charter, Limitation and Arrears Recovery
Source Language
English
Family Law Civil Procedure Contract Law (misrepresentation) Enforcement Consent Orders Rescission of Orders for Misrepresentation Maintenance Enforcement Section 118 Women’s Charter +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YBG

Applicant (husband)

YBH

Respondent (wife)

Procedural Posture

Family Court Ancillary Proceedings Arising From Divorce (originating Application to Vary/reciss and Maintenance Summons) / Trial on Enforcement Summons and Oral Hearing of Rescission Application (combined Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope of court’s power under s118 WC to rescind a consent maintenance order for misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether Husband proved fraudulent (or other) misrepresentation sufficient to rescind the Maintenance Order
  3. 3 If not rescinded, what enforcement orders should be made to compel payment of arrears

Ratio Decidendi

The Husband failed to prove any actionable misrepresentation: allegations were insufficiently particularised, lacked contemporaneous or witness evidence, and were inconsistent with his own solicitors’ correspondence and conduct (including attempts to renegotiate and extensive delay). Section 118 applies but the elements of fraudulent misrepresentation were not satisfied on the requisite cogent balance of probabilities. Accordingly OADV 709 (rescission) is dismissed and the Maintenance Order stands; enforcement under s71 succeeds and arrears of S$68,000 are ordered payable in instalments with specified show-payment conditions and a short default imprisonment term.

Court Disposition

OADV 709 dismissed; MSS 1726 allowed in part (enforcement of maintenance order granted)

Orders

  • Rescission application dismissed; paragraph 3e of the Interim Judgment (Maintenance Order) not set aside
  • Enforcement order for outstanding maintenance arrears of S$68,000