YCD v YCE

YCD v YCE

Summons No 2950 to strike out OAG 154 was dismissed. The court held OAG 154 disclosed a reasonable cause of action because the pleaded facts showed a question fit to be tried and the respondent failed to demonstrate the application had no chance of success; whether the court may order paternity testing is a live question fit for trial; the extended doctrine of res judicata did not apply because the respondent was not a party to the divorce proceedings and there was no privity or mechanism by which the issue could have been litigated in those proceedings; the rule against double recovery did not plainly bar a second maintenance order and raises questions for trial about quantum,...

Citation
[2026] SGFC 58
Parties
Applicant: YCD; Respondent: YCE
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
23 April 2026
Case Number
FC/OAG 154/2025 ( FC/SUM 2950/2025,FC/SUM 2649/2025 )
Procedural Posture
Originating Application (family Court) OAG 154/2025 / Striking Out Application (summons No 2950/2025) — Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
SUM 2950 dismissed; OAG 154 not struck out and to proceed to hearing
Legal Topics
Paternity Testing, Child Maintenance, Abuse of Process, Extended Doctrine of Res Judicata, Double Recovery, Striking Out Applications, Pre Action Discovery
Source Language
English
Family Law Civil Procedure Evidence Res Judicata Paternity Testing Child Maintenance Abuse of Process Extended Doctrine of Res Judicata +3 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 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YCD

Applicant

YCE

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Application (family Court) OAG 154/2025 / Striking Out Application (summons No 2950/2025) — Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether OAG 154 disclosed a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the court has power to order paternity testing
  3. 3 Whether the extended doctrine of res judicata barred the application

Ratio Decidendi

Summons No 2950 to strike out OAG 154 was dismissed. The court held OAG 154 disclosed a reasonable cause of action because the pleaded facts showed a question fit to be tried and the respondent failed to demonstrate the application had no chance of success; whether the court may order paternity testing is a live question fit for trial; the extended doctrine of res judicata did not apply because the respondent was not a party to the divorce proceedings and there was no privity or mechanism by which the issue could have been litigated in those proceedings; the rule against double recovery did not plainly bar a second maintenance order and raises questions for trial about quantum,...

Court Disposition

SUM 2950 dismissed; OAG 154 not struck out and to proceed to hearing

Orders

  • SUM 2950 dismissed
  • OAG 154 not struck out