Redditer: Rare Divorce Outcome

[Tree]

​

​

​

Rare Divorce Outcome​

Husband gets 67% of matrimonial assets, sole care and control of 3 children, instead of closer to even split and mother, being the home maker have sole care and control of children.

"In a judgment published on May 20, High Court Justice Dedar Singh Gill noted that the woman had directly contributed around 5.9 per cent, or $400,000, to the asset pool, while the man provided around $6.4 million.

He said that the man, 45, bore most of the indirect financial contributions as he had greater financial capacity, and his supplementary credit card enabled the wife to pay for household expenses.

Meanwhile, the wife, 44, assumed greater responsibilities on the homemaking front.

She looked after their three children, aged nine to 16, oversaw their studies and managed the household, including supervising their helper.

“It is also notable that the wife supported the husband’s career, having resigned from her job to commence work at the husband’s company,” the judge said."

"In giving the husband sole care and control of the children, Justice Gill said he found the husband was able to provide a more robust care arrangement for the children, including having flexibility in his work to be more present for their daily needs."

Seems like unusually an bad deal for the women.
Did the women have a incompetent lawyer resulting in such outcome?

https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...llowed-husband-to-grow-business?ref=top-story

 

[syed putra]

The " Dut" Will side with the man.

 

[rocket]

​

​

​

Rare Divorce Outcome​

Husband gets 67% of matrimonial assets, sole care and control of 3 children, instead of closer to even split and mother, being the home maker have sole care and control of children.

"In a judgment published on May 20, High Court Justice Dedar Singh Gill noted that the woman had directly contributed around 5.9 per cent, or $400,000, to the asset pool, while the man provided around $6.4 million.

He said that the man, 45, bore most of the indirect financial contributions as he had greater financial capacity, and his supplementary credit card enabled the wife to pay for household expenses.

Meanwhile, the wife, 44, assumed greater responsibilities on the homemaking front.

She looked after their three children, aged nine to 16, oversaw their studies and managed the household, including supervising their helper.

“It is also notable that the wife supported the husband’s career, having resigned from her job to commence work at the husband’s company,” the judge said."

"In giving the husband sole care and control of the children, Justice Gill said he found the husband was able to provide a more robust care arrangement for the children, including having flexibility in his work to be more present for their daily needs."

Seems like unusually an bad deal for the women.
Did the women have a incompetent lawyer resulting in such outcome?

https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...llowed-husband-to-grow-business?ref=top-story

Either the wife requested or there is something against her.

 

[superpower]

1. Husband given sole custody of all 3 kids means wife had affair or exhibited unreasonable behavior
2. Bayi judge from misogynistic culture tilted the judgement further in husband's favor

 

[Sustanon]

Can bring the wife to Spain to rekindle the relationship? Watching sunset at the edge of a cliff sounds romantic too doesn't it?

 

[laksaboy]

Just stay away from marriage and you will be spared from such nonsense.