可以告诉你朋友的朋友的朋友,此路不通
所在版块:社会百科 发贴时间:2015-11-24 09:48

用户信息
复制本帖HTML代码
高亮: 今天贴 X 昨天贴 X 前天贴 X 

THD v THE [2015] SGFC 136

there was a dispute in respect of the sum of $340,000 which had been withdrawn by the Wife from her bank accounts in the months preceding the granting of the Interim Judgement.

11     In this regard, it was undisputed that the Wife had made cash withdrawals of $210,000 on 6th March 2013 and $130,000 on 6th November 2013 for the purpose of creating two trusts in favour of the daughter [Note 1]. The Wife explained that she had taken these steps to “bypass the probate process” in the event of her untimely death. The Husband contended that these amounts should be included into the matrimonial pool as the Wife’s assets.

12     The Husband’s counsel referred to the commentary made by Professor Leong Wai Kum in Elements of Family Law in respect of the unreported case of CH v CI [2004]SGDC 131 where she commented at page 584 in respect of insurance policies as follows:

Where no irrevocable trust has been made, the court will have full powers to order as it sees fit of this matrimonial asset….. where an irrevocable trust is made to benefit some other person, the value of the policy will be among the other assets in the basket of “matrimonial assets” but again in its consequential order to achieve the proportions of division, the court will ensure that the spouse-policy holder will obtain this asset so that she will then take whatever steps she sees fit with regard to whether to change or terminate the trust created.”

13     While the above comments were made strictly in respect of insurance policies, the general principles observed in my view apply equally to the current situation. Regardless of whether the trust was revocable or irrevocable, it was clear that these amounts should be included as assets in the basket of matrimonial assets. I also found the timing of the creation of these trusts, one shortly before and one shortly after the commencement of divorce proceedings on 14 June 2013, telling. It was on this basis that I accepted the Husband’s position and considered that this sum of $340,000 should be included as part of the matrimonial assets. As the Wife had provided no details as to whether the trust was irrevocable or revocable and I was mindful to consider that it would be best in the circumstances if this sum is attributed to the Wife in making my final consequential orders to achieve the proportions of division of the matrimonial property.

.
欢迎来到华新中文网,踊跃发帖是支持我们的最好方法!

 相关帖子 我要回复↙ ↗回到正文
【万能求助】南洋暴雪讲法律之六 - 放心,结婚了财产不会“充公” 南洋暴雪   (22644 bytes , 5507reads )
这是在新加坡rom的前提下吧 国大大叔   (124 bytes , 58reads )
用哪国法律取决于你在哪里生活 南洋暴雪   (24 bytes , 69reads )
确定吗。。。。我明明记得有以往的案例 国大大叔   (129 bytes , 62reads )
你先别找案例套事实 南洋暴雪   (417 bytes , 62reads )
谢谢版主推荐。可是这本书绝版了。国大大叔可以在国大RBR借,我就没法子了[…] 赶超美日   (20 bytes , 116reads )
google "book in book out" 南洋暴雪   (51 bytes , 55reads )
非常感谢 赶超美日   (0 bytes , 130reads )
就身边朋友的案例给大家参考一下 心酸的味道   (1525 bytes , 75reads )
求教南洋版主 走走   (249 bytes , 46reads )
在中国离婚适用中国法律, 南洋暴雪   (1126 bytes , 110reads )
谢谢版主,貌似很多地方不清楚会影响结果 走走   (14 bytes , 61reads )
目测走走同学的朋友的朋友的朋友是投资unit trust,不是建了一个trust 赶超美日   (0 bytes , 66reads )
金融投资等非讼业务我不擅长。 南洋暴雪   (43 bytes , 59reads )
这个,我还真不清楚,去问问看 走走   (94 bytes , 58reads )
可以告诉你朋友的朋友的朋友,此路不通 赶超美日   (3946 bytes , 67reads )
他们要走什么路我还不知道呢 走走   (12 bytes , 68reads )
婚前设的irrevocable trust目测不是婚内财产 赶超美日   (107 bytes , 50reads )
最近太忙了 南洋暴雪   (54 bytes , 212reads )
子女的财产权益 南洋暴雪   (25 bytes , 52reads )
参不参与分配不是根据是否个人所得,是根据是否婚前所得。中国新加坡法律不同[…] 赶超美日   (116 bytes , 60reads )
PO主结婚了吗? yoselin   (0 bytes , 54reads )
结婚啦,并且太太支持他转行读法律 凡人   (22 bytes , 53reads )
跟写文有关么? 南洋暴雪   (22 bytes , 59reads )
那句经典的广告语:保证您得利益,不吃亏 yoselin   (0 bytes , 42reads )
让我想到何XX律师事务所,办理离婚案件2500..... yoselin   (0 bytes , 73reads )
思维跳的好快 南洋暴雪   (43 bytes , 65reads )
是觉得你在给自己打软文广告吗? 凡人   (27 bytes , 48reads )
你想多了 南洋暴雪   (216 bytes , 65reads )
我是在猜测你楼上的意思 凡人   (26 bytes , 49reads )
无视我的提问吧,看帖不仔细,汗 凡人   (0 bytes , 43reads )
还是看不懂 艾嘎嘎   (641 bytes , 57reads )
财产权在于处分权 南洋暴雪   (312 bytes , 62reads )
关于a 南洋暴雪   (173 bytes , 59reads )
谢谢版主 艾嘎嘎   (604 bytes , 62reads )
分配是整体参与分配 南洋暴雪   (293 bytes , 56reads )
好的 艾嘎嘎   (611 bytes , 51reads )
答案找到了 南洋暴雪   (1955 bytes , 78reads )
学习了~ 艾嘎嘎   (838 bytes , 72reads )
各有各的问题。 南洋暴雪   (72 bytes , 58reads )
你以为在新加坡就没有互相藏互相骗啊! love962397   (10 bytes , 46reads )
“多”一字被你理解成别国没有? 南洋暴雪   (0 bytes , 45reads )
喔,是我理解错了。 love962397   (76 bytes , 44reads )
那是..... 南洋暴雪   (32 bytes , 79reads )
是的 艾嘎嘎   (66 bytes , 41reads )
还是要回到定量分析 南洋暴雪   (408 bytes , 66reads )
谢谢 艾嘎嘎   (66 bytes , 46reads )
我也是看了半天没看懂,不知道是翻译问题还是什么问题 安妮小小   (0 bytes , 38reads )
如果夫妻是一个中国籍 一个新加坡籍呢? 若水三千   (61 bytes , 69reads )
请回去看我以前发的讲法律文 南洋暴雪   (0 bytes , 73reads )
请问版主江湖中盛传的双方各自进工资的个人银行户口里的钱不作婚内财产划分是怎么回事 赶超美日   (0 bytes , 62reads )
这个只能问“江湖” 南洋暴雪   (0 bytes , 48reads )
赞这一点 vililytan   (265 bytes , 60reads )
会。 南洋暴雪   (73 bytes , 71reads )
但是如何证明妈妈经常在家照顾孩子,粑粑没有呢? yanzifei   (0 bytes , 57reads )
难道小孩是哑巴? 南洋暴雪   (0 bytes , 58reads )
如果孩子很小还不会说话呢 yanzifei   (0 bytes , 82reads )
败给你了 南洋暴雪   (79 bytes , 76reads )
哈哈,所以多些和宝宝一起的照片还是有额外的作用嗒 yanzifei   (0 bytes , 48reads )
难道法官不问你谁给你拍的? 无声听雷   (0 bytes , 43reads )
哈哈,笑惨了:) 枫的颜色   (0 bytes , 43reads )
继续贴案例 ARX v ARY [2015] SGHC 55 赶超美日   (8296 bytes , 94reads )
糊涂了,间接贡献没列,妻子:直接贡献27-30%,总贡献50% -》平分 赶超美日   (0 bytes , 64reads )
如果没有孩子呢… piaopiao6732   (53 bytes , 54reads )
贴段上次发的那个案子法官的原话: 南洋暴雪   (416 bytes , 64reads )
如果这个男方一直工作在新… piaopiao6732   (67 bytes , 65reads )
这段话的重点在 南洋暴雪   (84 bytes , 96reads )
赡养费是必须要给的吗? piaopiao6732   (44 bytes , 48reads )
理论上应该给。 南洋暴雪   (131 bytes , 57reads )
这不是自相矛盾吗? Saira   (166 bytes , 41reads )
请作定量分析 南洋暴雪   (224 bytes , 59reads )
参考之前说的那个案子 南洋暴雪   (143 bytes , 85reads )
再点赞好脾气,哈哈 赶超美日   (0 bytes , 47reads )
949494,楼主法律知识渊博,说话又有智慧,简直膜拜:) 枫的颜色   (0 bytes , 45reads )
+10086 Saira   (0 bytes , 44reads )
不太理解没孩子的家庭 vililytan   (86 bytes , 59reads )
哪里有什么老人啊…我身边的同事… piaopiao6732   (28 bytes , 48reads )
vililytan   (34 bytes , 43reads )
在天朝,离婚的时候 love962397   (80 bytes , 62reads )
天朝的难度在于执行判决 凡人   (32 bytes , 36reads )
不经时间考验对半分鼓励短期投机,令双方互耍心计,各出奇谋, 赶超美日   (12 bytes , 47reads )
就是因为对半分这个概念 vililytan   (70 bytes , 48reads )
咨询一个房产写谁名的问题 纠结的马甲   (363 bytes , 73reads )
回答 南洋暴雪   (362 bytes , 230reads )
点赞,加一个-“控制”了存款并不代表可以让任何一方净身出户 赶超美日   (30 bytes , 59reads )
受教了 哎呀我倒   (6 bytes , 48reads )