XSP v XSQ

XSP v XSQ

On the evidence the Wife failed to discharge the burden on balance of probabilities: the parties had a longstanding, mutual division of roles with the Husband managing finances and business; the Wife provided insufficient corroborative evidence of controlling or disrespectful conduct that met the objective standard under s.95(3)(b); isolated incidents (including the café closure) did not, individually or cumulatively, render it unreasonable to expect cohabitation; accordingly the divorce claim was dismissed and costs fixed against the Wife.

Citation
[2025] SGFC 107
Parties
Plaintiff (wife): XSP; Defendant (husband): XSQ
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
6 October 2025
Case Number
FC/D 6185/2023|HCF/DCA 78/2025
Procedural Posture
Divorce (family Court) / Trial Judgment (wife's Divorce Claim Dismissed); Appeal Notice Filed by Wife
Outcome
Wife's claim for divorce dismissed; no decree of divorce granted.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Unreasonable Behaviour, Statutory Interpretation of S.95 of the Women’s Charter, Costs
Source Language
English
Family Law Divorce Unreasonable Behaviour Statutory Interpretation of S.95 of the Women’s Charter Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XSP

Plaintiff (wife)

XSQ

Defendant (husband)

Procedural Posture

Divorce (family Court) / Trial Judgment (wife's Divorce Claim Dismissed); Appeal Notice Filed by Wife

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Husband behaved such that the Wife cannot reasonably be expected to live with him under s.95(3)(b) Women’s Charter
  2. 2 Whether incidents relied upon should be disregarded under s.95(6) Women’s Charter
  3. 3 Whether cumulative conduct met the objective standard for unreasonable behaviour

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the Wife failed to discharge the burden on balance of probabilities: the parties had a longstanding, mutual division of roles with the Husband managing finances and business; the Wife provided insufficient corroborative evidence of controlling or disrespectful conduct that met the objective standard under s.95(3)(b); isolated incidents (including the café closure) did not, individually or cumulatively, render it unreasonable to expect cohabitation; accordingly the divorce claim was dismissed and costs fixed against the Wife.

Court Disposition

Wife's claim for divorce dismissed; no decree of divorce granted.

Orders

  • Wife's claim dismissed
  • Costs fixed at 12000 payable by the Wife to the Husband