S'pore woman, who abused 4 of 5 adopted children, gets 5.1% of S$10.9 million in matrimonial assets in divorce

A woman who abused four of the five children she and her husband had adopted was awarded 5.1 per cent of almost S$10.9 million in matrimonial assets, according to court documents seen by Mothership.

This percentage amounts to around S$555,900.

Justice Choo Han Teck found that the 55-year-old wife did not make significant contributions to the family during their 16-year marriage.

Instead, he said that she “was the cause of its pain and suffering”, given her repeated abuse of her children.

Abuse of children leading to Child Protective Services (CPS) intervention

The Singaporean couple, who married in 2008, adopted five children between 2013 and 2018 after being unable to conceive naturally.

The wife currently draws a salary of S$6,000 from a company owned by herself and the husband’s business partner’s wife while the husband, a director of three companies, draws a monthly salary of S$9,160.

The wife abused all of the children, except for the second-oldest who was spared due to being reportedly favoured by her.

The abuse was significant enough for CPS to remove all of the children, except for the one the wife liked, from their home and place them in children’s homes.

The 53-year-old husband, but not the wife, continued to have full access to them under CPS arrangements, while the second oldest still resided with him.

The husband filed multiple applications over the years, including for personal protection orders (PPOs) for himself and the eldest child, as well as an application under the Guardianship of Infants Act 1934.

Wife absent from divorce proceedings

The couple’s divorce proceedings began after the abuse came to light.

Although the wife initially participated in mediation, she stopped attending court from Apr. 15, 2025.

She filed no affidavit of assets and means, and did not contribute to the joint summary required in ancillary matters.

This meant that she did not disclose any of her financial information, nor did she give any statement on her contributions or assets.

Her absence meant the court relied almost entirely on the husband’s evidence regarding the valuation of assets.

Why 5.1 per cent

The matrimonial asset pool was assessed at S$10,868,138.04, comprising of:

S$2.84 million in the husband’s name

S$8.03 million in the wife’s name (though many of her listed assets had no proven value)

The main asset was the matrimonial home, a house valued at S$14.68 million, half of which was held in the wife’s name as a tenant-in-common.

Justice Choo found that husband acquired nearly all their assets through his efforts while the wife “made hardly any indirect contributions”, and instead caused emotional and physical harm through years of abuse.

The husband said that he had provided the wife with a "comfortable life" and that he became the primary caregiver for the children after she constantly abused them.

The judge therefore apportioned, in favour of the husband:

95.5 per cent : 4.5 per cent for direct contributions

92.5 per cent : 7.5 per cent for indirect contributions

This resulted in a final breakdown of 94.9 per cent (husband) : 5.1 per cent (wife).

While the wife’s non-disclosure of assets usually merited a downward adjustment of her entitlement in ordinary circumstances, the judge decided not make any more deductions as her entitlement was already “so low”.

Justice Choo also ruled that no spousal maintenance was required as long as the wife continued earning her S$6,000 salary

However, the husband must pay this same amount should her salary cease, which is likely if she chooses to transfer the 50 per cent shares she has in one of the companies back to her husband.

The couple had signed a post-nuptial agreement in 2022 stating that the wife would receive none of the husband’s assets or maintenance, should the marriage fail.

However, the judge declined to rely wholly on this agreement, noting the wife had not received legal advice and may not have understood the document.

It was instead treated as only one factor in deciding the final division.

Custody awarded to husband

Justice Choo granted the husband sole custody, care and control of all five children.

The husband is not claiming any child maintenance from the wife.

He ruled that the wife may only see the four abused children when permitted by CPS, and that she may have reasonable (but non-overnight) access to the one child whom she did not abuse.

With the matrimonial home to be transferred fully into the husband’s name, the judge said this would allow him to exclude the wife, bring the children back from CPS and eventually reunite all five children under one roof.

This was a living arrangement deemed “suitable” as the children reportedly “get along well”.

Top images via Pixabay