On 20 December 2024, the Ministry of Law (“MinLaw“) announced that, following the passing of the Family Justice Reform Act 2023 in Parliament on 8 May 2023, Phase 1 of the new Maintenance Enforcement Process (“MEP“) will be implemented on 16 January 2025. The new MEP will: (i) deter non-payment of maintenance; (ii) make enforcement easier when there is non-payment of maintenance; (iii) facilitate sustainable maintenance outcomes; and (iv) increase access to justice for applicants, especially those who are self-represented. For more information, please see our April 2023 NewsBytes article titled “Family Justice Reform Bill Passed in Parliament to Strengthen Family Therapeutic Justice”.
During Phase 1, the MEP will apply to eligible repeat maintenance enforcement applications, i.e. an application to enforce a maintenance order (made under the Women’s Charter 1961, the Guardianship of Infants Act 1934, the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966, and the Maintenance of Parents Act 1995) in respect of which: (i) there is at least one concluded maintenance enforcement application (i.e. the application and any appeal have been disposed of, and/or the time for appeal has lapsed); and (ii) there is no pending maintenance enforcement application.
No separate application is required for Phase 1 to apply, beyond the maintenance enforcement application being filed at the Family Justice Courts (“FJC“). Thereafter, the FJC will refer eligible cases to the newly-established Maintenance Enforcement Division (“MED“) sited in MinLaw, and Phase 1 will automatically apply unless the court directs otherwise. Respondents undergoing the MEP will be charged a fee of S$180 (inclusive of GST) for the Maintenance Enforcement Officers’ (“MEOs’“) services.
However, if this is the first maintenance enforcement application being made, the MEP will not apply during Phase 1, and the FJC’s existing maintenance enforcement process will apply instead. In its later phases, the MEP will be expanded to apply to more categories of maintenance enforcement applications and the S$180 fee will be reviewed to ensure alignment with the objectives of the MEP.
Under the MEP, the court may, at any time after a maintenance enforcement application is made, refer the application to MEOs from the MED. Thereafter:
- Conciliation. The MEOs: (i) may conduct conciliation to facilitate amicable agreement between parties on the issues; (ii) may make recommendations to parties as to how to resolve their disputes on any issue; and (iii) will be empowered to obtain information from parties, or may request the court to order the parties, banks or other third parties to provide relevant information.
- Report. The MEOs will submit a report to the FJC. This will enable the FJC to: (i) more accurately determine parties’ financial circumstances; (ii) distinguish between respondents who cannot pay maintenance and those who refuse to do so; and (iii) make more targeted and effective enforcement orders to recover maintenance arrears.
- Referral. The MEOs may also refer suitable parties to financial assistance.
The possible court outcomes under the MEP are as follows:
- Consent order. If conciliation is successful, the court will record a consent order based on parties’ agreement.
- Maintenance payment order. Where the court is satisfied that the maintenance order in question has been breached and there is no consent order made on the maintenance order application, the court must make an order specifying: (i) the amount of maintenance arrears to be paid; and (ii) how the respondent is to pay the arrears.
- Show-payment order (“SPO”). Where the court is satisfied that the maintenance order in question has been breached and there is no consent order made on the maintenance enforcement application, the court must make an SPO: (i) requiring the respondent to show proof of payment to the court for a specified period; and (ii) unless special circumstances exist, stating that the respondent is liable to imprisonment if the respondent fails to show such proof. If there is no payment under the SPO, the respondent will be imprisoned, unless the respondent can show good cause for failing to do so. Even in cases where the court makes a consent order, the court may still make an SPO (in the exercise of its discretion). In practice, the SPO will likely be ordered for applicable maintenance enforcement consent orders to achieve the MEP’s objectives above.
Click on the following links for more information (available on the MinLaw website at www.mlaw.gov.sg):
Disclaimer
Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of member firms with local legal practices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Our Asian network also includes our regional office in China as well as regional desks focused on Brunei, Japan and South Asia. Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local requirements.
The contents of this publication are owned by Rajah & Tann Asia together with each of its member firms and are subject to all relevant protection (including but not limited to copyright protection) under the laws of each of the countries where the member firm operates and, through international treaties, other countries. No part of this publication may be reproduced, licensed, sold, published, transmitted, modified, adapted, publicly displayed, broadcast (including storage in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently for any purpose save as permitted herein) without the prior written permission of Rajah & Tann Asia or its respective member firms.
Please note also that whilst the information in this publication is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as legal advice or a substitute for specific professional advice for any particular course of action as such information may not suit your specific business and operational requirements. You should seek legal advice for your specific situation. In addition, the information in this publication does not create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on the information in this publication.
