SINGAPORE: An Australian man was ordered to add about S$10 million to the matrimonial pool of assets to be shared with his Malaysian ex-wife after the court found him attempting to hide his wealth during his divorce.
The decision signalled the court's "utter contempt" for his actions, The Straits Times reported.
Judicial Commissioner Mohamed Faizal Mohamed Abdul Kadir described the case as one of the most brazen attempts at concealing assets in divorce cases.
"It represents a fraud not just on the court, but on all of the parties involved in the litigation and the wider justice system," he said in a judgment released on Jan 9.
The man's former wife, a 38-year-old Malaysian working in Singapore, was awarded 69 per cent of the matrimonial assets—about S$7 million— exceeding the 50 per cent she originally sought.
Before the $10 million was included, the couple's assets amounted to just over S$100,000.
The couple, who have a six-year-old child, filed for divorce in 2023 after the man moved out of their Singapore home in 2022.
The man, 39, claiming to be self-employed, painted an "utterly unbelievable picture" of having only tens of thousands of dollars in assets, despite evidence of substantial wealth.
Initially, he disclosed only three bank accounts with a combined balance of S$11,732 and claimed his Central Provident Fund (CPF) account was empty. He denied owning shares locally or overseas.
However, a discovery application filed by the woman uncovered his role as a director and shareholder in a "well-resourced" group of companies operating in Australia, Indonesia, and Singapore. The Indonesian entity alone had paid-up capital of about $12 million, with the man holding over 80 per cent of its shares.
The court also found that he received monthly payments ranging from A$2,500 (S$2,100) to A$10,000 in 2023 from the group's Australian entity. Yet, the man insisted the companies were worthless and failed to provide supporting documents.
Judicial Commissioner Faizal concluded the man was "committed to hiding his assets" and drew an adverse inference from his lack of full and frank disclosure.
Adverse inferences allow courts to estimate the value of concealed assets and include them in the matrimonial pool for division.
