Singapore man demands a cut from his wife’s S$450K insurance payout after she suffered a double stroke

SINGAPORE: A Singapore man failed in his attempt to claim part of his ex-wife’s more than S$450,000 critical illness insurance payout during their divorce, after the High Court ruled the money was meant to support her recovery rather than be divided as a matrimonial asset.

The woman suffered two strokes in 2017 and 2020, leaving her unable to walk or return to work. Four of her critical illness policies paid out more than S$450,000, while a fifth provides her with S$1,200 every month for life, Mothership reported (July 19), citing court documents.

Insurance payout was meant for medical care and living expenses, not asset division

The husband argued that he had indirectly funded most of the insurance premiums because he was the family’s primary income earner. He said the payouts should be included in the pool of matrimonial assets and divided during the divorce.

The man’s former wife disagreed. She said the money wasn’t an investment gain but financial support after a genuine medical crisis. Since she could no longer work, the payouts were being used for medical treatment and daily living expenses.

Senior High Court Judge Tan Siong Thye rejected the husband’s claim, saying there was no evidence to support it. The judge also found it inconsistent with the husband’s own position that he had been the family’s primary breadwinner.

The court rejected the allegation over insurance policies

The husband also accused his wife of trying to reduce the matrimonial pool by spending money on medical insurance. The court dismissed that allegation.

Judge Tan explained that life insurance policies held mainly as investments may form part of matrimonial assets. However, critical illness payouts differ when intended to compensate someone for the lasting effects of a serious illness and to help cover long-term care and lost earning capacity.

On that basis, the court ruled the husband had no claim over the payout.

Wife received a larger share after the property was assessed separately

The couple married in 2009. It was the second marriage for both, and each had two children from previous marriages. They also have two sons together, one of whom has autism, while the younger son has learning difficulties.

The wife brought a fully paid HDB flat from her first marriage into the relationship. The court treated that property separately, giving her full credit for its value before dividing the remaining assets.

In the end, she received about S$960,000 in matrimonial assets, while the husband received about S$765,000. The Family Justice Court also decided not to award her spousal maintenance because her monthly insurance payment of S$1,200 was considered sufficient.

The ruling separates care from shared wealth

Divorce cases involving insurance can be complicated, but this decision reinforces an important distinction. Courts may divide assets built during a marriage, yet compensation paid to help someone cope with a life-changing illness serves a different purpose. In this case, the court found that the purpose outweighed the husband’s claim to share the money.