XWO v XWN

[2025] SGFC 142 Family Court 29 December 2025 • HCF/DCA 126/2025 • 34 min read

Key facts

Court	Family Court
Decided	29 December 2025
Judge	Phang Hsiao Chung
Charges / claim	Family Law
Counsel	Harry Elias Partnership LLP, PY Legal LLC, Audrey Liaw Shu Juan, Clement Yap Ying Jie, Jasmine Chang Jia Min, Jerome Tan, Laura Eng Sing Joo, Peggy Sarah Yee May Kuen

Source: [2025] SGFC 142, Family Court, decided 29 December 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 25 June 2026.

Catchwords

Family Law - Maintenance - Child Family Law - Maintenance - Wife

Practice Areas

Family Law

Judges (1)

Phang Hsiao Chung Delivered

Counsel (8)

Harry Elias Partnership LLP Firm PY Legal LLC Firm Audrey Liaw Shu Juan Counsel Respondent Clement Yap Ying Jie Counsel Applicant Jasmine Chang Jia Min Counsel Applicant Jerome Tan Counsel Respondent Laura Eng Sing Joo Counsel Applicant Peggy Sarah Yee May Kuen Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

XWN Applicant XWO Respondent

Case Significance

[2025] SGFC 142 is a Family Court decision dated 29 December 2025 concerning Family Law, specifically addressing maintenance. The judgment was delivered by Phang Hsiao Chung. The case was brought by XWN (applicant) against XWO (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Harry Elias Partnership LLP and PY Legal LLC.

Summary

A wife and mother of four children applied under section 69 of the Women's Charter for maintenance from her high-earning husband, who had unilaterally left the family and resigned from his lucrative employment. The court ordered the father to pay substantial child maintenance totalling over $788,000 for the period September 2023 to September 2025, with ongoing monthly payments thereafter.

What was decided in [2025] SGFC 142?

[2025] SGFC 142 (XWO v XWN) is a Family Court decision from 29 December 2025 addressing Family Law, specifically maintenance. The judgment was delivered by Phang Hsiao Chung.

Who were the parties in XWO v XWN ([2025] SGFC 142)?

The applicant in [2025] SGFC 142 was XWN, and the respondent was XWO. Legal representation included Harry Elias Partnership LLP and PY Legal LLC. The case was decided on 29 December 2025 in the Family Court.