SINGAPORE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Lay Lian Kee, Min Joo Yoon, Shawn Teo and Sarah Tan, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP 9 Straits View #06-07
West Tower Marina One 018937 Singapore Tel: +65 6535 3600 Email: info@rajahtannasia.com Web: sg.rajahtannasia.com
Recent Developments in the Law on International Child Relocation in Singapore In the 2024 edition of the Child Relocation Trends and Developments chapter of this guide, the authors pro - vided an overview of significant case developments in Singapore on the international relocation of children in the last decade since the seminal court of appeal decision of BNS v BNT [2015] SGCA 23 and provided some guidance for legal practitioners advising their Singapore-based clients on international relocation of children. To recap, the following was explained. Pre- BNS v BNT , the reasonableness of the party hav - ing custody in wanting to take the child out of jurisdic - tion was determinative, such that if the intended move abroad was not unreasonable or done in bad faith, the court only disallowed the child to be taken out of juris - diction if it was shown that the interest of the child was incompatible with the desire of the relocating parent. In BNS v BNT , there was a realignment of the child’s interests as paramount consideration, but this time with a renewed focus on the left-behind parent’s relationship with the child. The non-relocating par - ent’s close ties to the children, and the likelihood of a future relationship between the children and the non- relocating parent was given greater weight, so that in the cases that immediately followed BNS v BNT the possible loss of the non-relocating parent’s rela - tionship with the child became a significant factor in the court’s assessment of whether relocation was in a child’s best interests. This marked a complete pen - dulum shift from the wishes of the custodial parent to the interests of the non-custodial parent.
Subsequently, with the emergence of the 2018 court of appeal case of TSF v TSE [2018] SGCA 49 and up to the 2024 High Court (Family Division) decision in WRU v WRT [2024] SGHCF 23, there had been a recalibration of the Singapore courts’ approach towards the assessment of a child’s best interests, with the court undertaking a more holistic exercise to weigh and determine various factors in its assessment of whether relocation would be in a child’s best inter - ests, rather than prioritising the wishes of the relocat - ing parent or the non-relocating parent. Some of these factors include (but are not limited to) the following: • wishes of the parents; • wishes of the child; • loss of relationship with left-behind parents; • age of the child; • well-settledness of the child in the country; • connecting factors to the country; • immigration status of the parent/child to continue to remain in the country and/or the desired place of relocation; • family support, resources and opportunities avail - able to the child and the relocating parent; • parenting plan for the child upon relocation; • provision access and contact time, both physical and remote, for the left-behind parent; and • needs of the child, including education, special needs or health concerns. With the adoption of this holistic approach and mul - tifactorial analysis, the Singapore courts have been more open to considering relocation applications in
108 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook