SINGAPORE

1. The case of Lee Yong Chuan Edwin v Tan Soan Lian (2000) SGCA 68, the court was
reviewing the appeal for decreasing maintenance to be paid in a lump sum for 10
years. The respondent, who was married to the appellant for 12 years and had 2
children from this marriage, was a housewife who has contributed to the welfare of
the family by managing the house and taking care of the children. The couple was
used to a lavish lifestyle as the husband was employed as an executive in a large
construction corporation. The court has accounted for all these circumstances as well
as the fact that the wife didn’t possess the skills to become employed after divorce
and has allotted her the maintenance of $960,000, calculated at the rate of $8,000 a
month, dismissing the appellant’s claim to decrease the alimony to $4,000.

UK

1. Mills vs Mills [2018] UKSC 38: On an application to vary maintenance, the court is
required to consider all the circumstances, as they are at the time of the variation. At
first instance, the judge found that Mrs Mills’ monthly income needs were £2,982 and
her net monthly income was £1,541. This left her with a shortfall of £1,441 per
month. The judge dismissed both parties' applications, leaving Mr Mills to continue
his payments of £1,100 per month under the 2002 order. Mrs Mills appealed. She
argued that she could not increase her earnings, and could not cut her expenditure
further, and that Mr Mills should therefore pay the whole of the shortfall between her
income needs and her income. Mr Mills cross-appealed. The Court of Appeal allowed
Mrs Mills’ appeal, finding that her needs were real, and that Mr Mills was in a
position to afford to meet them. The maintenance was increased to £1,441 per month,
on a joint lives basis. Mr Mills has appealed to the Supreme Court.
2. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/11/ex-wife-awarded-453m-in-
one-of-uks-biggest-ever-divorce-settlements
 USA

1. In one of the California decisions, the court noted: “We fail to see why Wife should
be deprived of her accustomed lifestyle just because it involved the purchase of stocks
and bonds rather than fur coats.” (In re Marriage of Winter, 7 Cal. App. 4th 1926
(1992).) Discussing the situation of the supported spouse, the Hawaii court opined
that “the ability to continue to save and build up one’s net worth is not a valid
standard of living consideration justifying the award of increased alimony/spousal
support.” (Kuroda v. Kuroda, 87 Haw. 419 (1998).)
2. The award of spousal maintenance is generally determined based on all or some of the
following guidelines: the recipient's financial needs; the payer's ability to pay; the age
and health of the parties; the standard of living the recipient became accustomed to
during the marriage; the length of the marriage; each party's ability to earn and be
self-supporting; and the recipient's nonmonetary contributions to the marriage. The
amount and length of spousal maintenance payments may be agreed to by the parties
and approved of by the court, or may be set by the court when the issue is contested.
Some states have adopted financial schedules to help judges determine the appropriate
level of support. Although maintenance generally takes the form of periodic payments
of money directly to the recipient, it can also constitute a payment to a third party to
satisfy an obligation of the receiving spouse. Maintenance may be set in a
predetermined amount, such as $1,000 a month, or it may be a fluctuating percentage,
such as 25 percent of the payer's gross income.
https://law.jrank.org/pages/8389/Maintenance.html

DUBAI
1. https://www.khaleejtimes.com/news/crime/woman-in-uae-takes-dh30000-alimony-
from-husband-after-re-marriage