Law on Maintenance Orders in Family Disputes

What is a maintenance order?

Maintenance is the provision of support (financial in nature) for wives, children or incapacitated husbands.

Some Examples of common maintenance orders include

1. Fixed monthly payments
2. Reimbursement (repayment) of specific expenses, either full or in part
3. Direct payment of expenses to a service provider (such as childcare centre or utilities provider)

Maintenance can also be backdated at the court’s discretion (for example, to start from a date before the maintenance application is made). When can maintenance order be can be granted

● Maintenance order may be granted during divorce proceeding (see s113(1) of the Women’s Charter 1961(“WC”)), or even when parties are remain married (see s69 of the WC).

● For child maintenance, the court may order maintenance when it is satisfied that a parent has neglected to provide reasonable maintenance for a child who is unable to maintain himself or herself. (see s69(S) of WC)

What would the court consider Maintenance Orders?

These are some elements that are typically considered by the court in granting maintenance orders (s114(1) of Women’s Charter):-

a. Parties’ financial needs;

b. Parties’ income earning capacity (if any), property and other financial resources;

c. Whether the party has any physical or mental disability;

d. Contributions made by each to the family welfare, including looking after the home or caring for the family, and the conduct of the parties;

e. Standard of living enjoyed before the neglect or refusal; and

f. In the case of a child, the child’s expenses and needs, the manner in which he/she was being, and in which the parties to the marriage expected him/her, to be educated or trained.

Can maintenance payments be ordered in lump sum instead of via periodic payments?

Lumpsum maintenance are usually seen more in spousal maintenance with short marriages.

Per AYM v AYL and another [2014[ 4 SLR 559,

a. A lump sum payment allows for a clean break in the marriage and should be availed of whenever feasible (Lee Puey Hwa v Tay Cheow Seng [1991] 2 SLR(R) 196 (“Lee Puey Hwa”) at [9]). Such a clean break may help avoid further litigation and acrimony between the parties (Wan Lai Cheng v Quek Seow Kee [2012] 4 SLR 405 (“Wan Lai Cheng”) at [88]). - Relevant circumstances that suggest parties have moved on with their lives are remarrying, relocating and caring for step children. In such cases, lump sum order is preferred.

b. A lump sum payment should not be ordered if it would cripple the husband financially (Lee Puey Hwa at [9]; and Neo Mei Lan Helena v Long Melvin Anthony [2002] 2 SLR(R) 616 (“Neo Mei Lan Helena”)).

c. A lump sum payment is appropriate where there is reason to believe that defaults in payments may be likely (Neo Mei Lan Helena; and BCS v BCT [2012] SGDC 338).

For child maintenance, it is highly unlikely to obtain a lumpsum maintenance due to a child’s ongoing needs.   What to do if you have an existing Maintenance Order, but your spouse has defaulted and refuses to make payment?

Enforcement of Maintenance orders

Enforcement application can only be filed after the respondent has failed to comply with the terms of the maintenance order

I. Who can apply to enforce maintenance orders?

1. The person who applied for the maintenance order
2. A person who is a payee under the maintenance order for the benefit of a child, and who is: a. Having custody or care and control of the child; or b. A trustee of the child
3. The person nominated by the appointed person (where the maintenance order was applied for by the person appointed by the Minister) to receive payment under the maintenance order
4. Any other person who has a right under any other written law to enforce the maintenance order

Imprisonment

Failure to prove payment of any maintenance arrears or the failure to prove payment of any payable maintenance attracts respective prison sentences (see Section 5 of the WC).

When will the court not enforce maintenance order against the respondent

Per VUJ v VUK [2021] SGFC 87, in making an order for enforcement, the court must bear in mind whether the making of an enforcement order would “lead to injustice: or whether it would be “inequitable to do so given the circumstance and the facts of the case”. These are cases where Court has refrained from granting enforcement orders :-

1. Where there was a mutual agreement between the parties that the amount of maintenance payable should be reduced

2. Where the respondent had either gone above and beyond what was required under the maintenance order (TDR v TDS [2014] SGDC 183)

3. Where the complainant had used the respondent’s money to pay for expenses falling within the scope of the maintenance order

4. Where the respondent had been diligently paying maintenance but had run into genuine financial difficulties and was therefore unable to keep up with the payments

The above article is not to be treated as legal advice and you should contact your lawyers to evaluate your maintenance claims based on your circumstances.