Married S'pore businessman ordered to pay S$64,800 in backdated child support for 2 children he fathered with ex-employee

A businessman in Singapore had a relationship with his regional sales manager, who began working in his company in 2011.

Subsequently, she gave birth to a girl in October 2016 and a boy in May 2022.

Both had other partners, and the man also has two children with his wife.

The pair broke up in 2023 and later faced each other in family court in October 2025 over a child maintenance dispute.

While the woman had pursued the fullest possible extent of backdated maintenance for the two children, the man asserted that he had no knowledge of being their biological father until after a paternity test was done for the proceedings.

According to a publicly available judgment dated Oct. 10, the man was ultimately ordered to pay a total of S$3,600 (S$1,800 for each child), in monthly maintenance starting September 2025.

He was also asked to pay S$64,800 in backdated maintenance from March 2024 (when the application was filed).

Additionally, he had to reimburse half of the costs of the paternity test to the woman, as well as the cost of a previously adjourned hearing date.

Background

The man was a businessman who "ran corporate interests in Singapore and Malaysia", and was married with two children.

The pair met after the woman joined his company in 2011 and subsequently formed a relationship that lasted until 2023.

The woman's age was noted to be "at the relatively younger age of 39" in the judgment, but the man's age was not disclosed.

After their relationship ended in 2023, she also left the company in June 2023.

They have differing accounts as to why she left: the man said it was because she "diverted business away" while she said it was because of her finding out about his affair with another colleague.

In February 2024, it was alleged that the woman contacted the man's wife, informing her that she had had two children with him.

She later commenced her application for child maintenance on Mar. 28, 2024, and paternity was later confirmed on Aug. 23, 2024, after testing.

Dispute over child maintenance costs and backdating

The woman had sought S$6,000 per month as maintenance for both children.

Furthermore, she sought the maximum backdated maintenance payments for both children.

It would start from Apr. 1, 2021, for the elder child —  the maximum period of three years prior to the time of the application, and it would start from May 2022 for the younger child — from his birth to the time of the application.

The man did not dispute that he should pay maintenance but proposed to pay S$2,517.34 to S$2,936.89 a month for the children instead.

He also requested that the backdating start only from March 2024, when the application was filed.

The question of when he knew

The judge looked into whether there was neglect or refusal to pay reasonable maintenance and whether the man knew he was the biological parent before the application was made in March 2024.

"The duty of a parent to maintain a child is rooted in biological fact – a parent should, without more, care for his or her own flesh and blood, where the child is unable to fend for himself," the judge wrote.

However, it would seem unreasonable to hold a parent as liable for neglect if it is unclear whether he had knowledge that he was the parent of the child, he added.

Evidence of knowledge

In support of her case, the woman provided evidence, including photographs of the daughter with the man for her birthday in 2022 and a photograph of the man with the infant son.

The judge noted that due to the nature of their relationship up until June 2023, it would not be unusual for the man to "tend to the children as part and parcel" of his relationship with the woman.

"While the respondent might have suspected that he was a parent to the daughter, that would not rise to the requisite level of knowledge that he was the biological parent," the judge wrote.

The woman also provided text messages from June 2023 where she had asked the man to “please ensure the transfer of the child’s expenses of $3,000 to my account on time every 1st of the month. You have not done so for this month – please do so quickly!”

The judge noted that the man’s response was simply to ask the applicant not to be so “extreme”, with no denial.

This would appear to be suggestive that the man had "at least assumed responsibility as the parent to at least one of the children", the judge also noted.

However, there was also critical evidence that pointed the other way.

The woman had made the statutory declaration in 2016 saying: The daughter’s "biological father who is of Malaysia Nationality is no longer in contact with me. His name and whereabouts are unknown”.

She tendered this to the Housing and Development Board (HDB) in 2020 as part of her request to buy a resale flat while retaining two private residential properties in Malaysia.

The man was aware of this declaration at the time, and both knew that the woman did have a Malaysian boyfriend.

It was also noted that the man had passed an “ang pow” (red packet) to the daughter in June 2023, and forwarded information on direct school admissions in May 2023 to the woman.

Considering the evidence presented, the judge found that the woman had not proven that there had been neglect to provide reasonable maintenance in the period preceding the application.

"It was likely that the applicant had suspected that he was the parent to one or even both children, but that was in any event not tantamount to actually having knowledge or positively acknowledging that he was their father, with all the attendant responsibilities of providing of them."

Backdated maintenance

On the issue of backdated maintenance, the judge noted that the woman did not file for maintenance until March 2024, even though the daughter and the son were born in 2016 and 2022, respectively.

Her counsel highlighted that the timeframe for backdated maintenance – for up to three years before March 2024 – aligned with the timeframe of her first drop in salary.

However, the judge pointed out that it appeared that the need for child maintenance became more acute from the time that she left the man’s company in June 2023.

The judge ultimately found that the balance was "better struck" by ordering that the backdated maintenance was to be paid from the time of application in March 2024.

Top photos from Canva