Court sets aside S$175,000 loan judgment against woman after new evidence of husband’s payments emerges

In a sworn statement, the husband said that he had transferred S$620,670 to his mother. He wrote that part of the amount was to “repay monies the (wife) borrowed from my mother”.

As the claim of S$220,185 could have been fully satisfied through the husband’s transfers, there is now a basis to suggest that the woman may have a defence of double recovery, said District Judge Chiah.

A double recovery is when a claimant is compensated more than once for the same loss or damage. In this case, it might be a double recovery if the mother-in-law were allowed to claim the same sum again.

A court-imposed gag order issued on Nov 10 to protect the identity of the woman’s child means that the woman, the mother-in-law and the woman’s husband cannot be named. 

THE HUSBAND’S SWORN STATEMENT

In his affidavit, the woman’s husband said he had channelled proceeds from the sale of the couple’s matrimonial home to his mother for several purposes.

These included repaying a joint loan of about S$314,304 used to purchase and renovate a property, as well as S$220,185, which he said his wife owed to his mother.

He also said that part of the funds was used to extend loans to two companies.

Court documents showed that the sale of the matrimonial home generated more than S$815,000, including S$60,000 in option money and over S$755,000 in sale proceeds.

Shortly after receiving these funds, the husband transferred a total of S$620,670 to his mother through multiple bank transfers between April and May 2024.