Man who took son out of China fails in appeal against S’pore court order to return child
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 06 Nov 2025
Author: Selina Lum
The court said it was in the boy’s best interests for him to return to China with his mother.
After losing a child custody battle in China, a 38-year-old man took his son to Singapore and enrolled him in an international school here without the consent of his ex-wife.
The 33-year-old woman turned to the Singapore courts and succeeded in getting custody of the boy so that he could return to China with her.
The father’s appeal against this decision was dismissed by a High Court judge, who said this was “a case of outright child abduction”.
The man tried to appeal further but failed.
On Nov 5, the Appellate Division of the High Court dismissed the man’s application for permission to appeal against the lower court’s decision.
In a written judgment, the Appellate Division agreed that it was in the boy’s best interests for him to return to China with his mother.
The boy, who is now six years old, had spent most of his life in China before he was taken to Singapore in December 2023.
The two-judge panel said: “The child does not have any permanent roots in Singapore, and it is of grave concern to us that neither of his parents hold long-term immigration permits to remain in Singapore.”
The boy’s ability to re-adapt to life in China has not been called into question, and there was no reason to doubt that he would not receive satisfactory education in his home country, the court noted.
The court, comprising Justice Hri Kumar Nair and Justice Debbie Ong, also clarified that international comity – a principle of mutual recognition among states for each other’s judicial decisions – was not a relevant factor.
The judges contrasted the current case with applications under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, an international treaty that establishes a procedure for parents with custody rights seeking the return of their “abducted” children.
Singapore is a signatory to the treaty, but China is not.
In such a situation, the Singapore court must regard the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration, rather than apply “quasi-Hague Convention rules”, said the court.
The boy’s parents, both Chinese citizens, were married in China in 2016.
In August 2023, a court in the city of Hangzhou granted the mother’s request for a divorce and ordered that the child “shall be raised and educated” by her.
The father’s appeal against this decision was dismissed on Nov 23 that year.
On the same day, he took the boy to Phuket, Thailand, ostensibly for a holiday.
On Dec 11, he took the child to Singapore, where the boy was enrolled in an international school.
The boy’s student pass was tied to his paternal grandmother’s long-term visit pass.
In February 2024, the mother obtained further orders from the Chinese courts against her former husband, including invalidating his travel documents.
When the boy was still not returned to her, she filed an application to Singapore’s Family Justice Courts in June 2024.
The woman, represented by Mr Cornelius Sng, sought an order for sole custody, and care and control of the child, and for the father to hand over the boy and his passport to her.
The man, represented by Mr Clarence Lun, opposed these proceedings.
On March 13, 2025, a district judge ruled in favour of the mother.
This decision was upheld by the High Court on Aug 28 following the man’s appeal.
On Sept 10, the mother wrote to the court, saying that she had returned to China with the child.
But the man wanted to appeal further, insisting that the mother and child were still in Singapore.
During a virtual hearing on Sept 29, the mother showed the court that she was on board a train in China.
In Singapore, the Ministry of Social and Family Development is the designated authority that handles cases under the Hague Convention.
Figures from the ministry showed that between 2019 and 2024, it handled 22 cases where a child was taken from Singapore to a signatory nation.
It has also handled 21 incoming cases where a child was brought to Singapore from a signatory nation.
Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
XLK v XLJ [2025] SGHC(A) 22
720