Shu Mei Hoon
Visit company website
With a niche practice in private client and matrimonial disputes, Shu Mei appears regularly for private clients at all levels of the Singapore Courts on all matters affecting the family including division of matrimonial assets, maintenance, custody and international relocation, and trust and property disputes.
Shu Mei was appointed a Fellow of the International Academy of Family Lawyers (IAFL) in 2021. IAFL is a worldwide association of practicing lawyers who are recognized by their peers as the most experienced family law specialists in their respective countries.
As an accredited mediator with SMC and SIMI, and an accredited Collaborative Family Practitioner, she strives to find common ground even in the most complex of cases in negotiations and mediations, whether as an advocate or a neutral. She has particular expertise drafting and negotiating prenuptial, postnuptial, financial arrangement and parenting agreements between family members.
Shu Mei also speaks regularly about family law, succession planning, dispute resolution and mediation at events and conferences. She is also the co-author of various academic articles and practitioner guides both locally and internationally.
Relevant experiences and positions
Shu Mei has been acknowledged for her work:
• Legal 500 2023: Private Wealth & Family Law (Tier 1)
‘…an up and coming rising star who is making a name for herself in the industry. Shu Mei’s ability to be a tenacious litigator yet explore all means of resolving matters amicably via mediation and other alternative dispute resolution options sets her apart from her peers in her field. Her flexibility and integrity are key strengths.’
• Chambers High Net Worth
Singapore: Family/Matrimonial: High Net Worth 2022 – Up and Coming
“Shu Mei is an up-and-coming lawyer who is experienced in family-related legal matters. Her practice encompasses asset distribution for high net worth couples going through divorce in addition to custody and relocation matters.”
• Asian Legal Business SE Asia Law Awards
Matrimonial and Family Law Firm of the Year 2021 & 2022
• Benchmark Litigation Asia-Pacific
Family & Matrimonial 2022 – Future Star
“Professional, knowledgeable, understanding, organised and personable.”
• Doyle’s Guide
Family Law in Singapore 2022 (Recommended)
• Citywealth Leaders List
Top 50 Private Client and Family Legal Heroes 2022
Top 100 Private Client Lawyers 2021
• Singapore Business Review (2023):
30 under 40 list
Some personal questions
What is your opinion on the law / case law on child relocation in your country?
In relocation applications, the court is concerned only with the paramount welfare of the child, and this overrides any other considerations (BNS v BNT [2015] 3 SLR 973).
No person is allowed to take a child who is subject to an order of custody or care and control out of Singapore, except with the written consent of both parents or the leave of court (section 126(3), Women’s Charter). A person with custody or care and control of the child can bring the child out of Singapore for up to a month without such consent or leave of court.
In AZB v AYZ [2012] 3 SLR 627, it was held that “the welfare of the child is often so inextricably intertwined with the general well-being and happiness of the primary caregiver that the court is loath to interfere with important life decisions of the primary caregiver, so long as they are reasonably made and are not against the interests of the child.” In this case, the court took into account the wife’s alienation, isolation and vulnerability in Singapore, and the benefits which relocating to the US would have on the wife’s emotional and financial wellbeing as the child’s main carer. The court concluded that the wife’s decision to relocate was in the best interests of the child and also that the husband had not been a good influence on the child.
AZB v AYZ and the later decisions of BNT v BNS [2014] 4 SLR 859, BNS v BNT [2015] SGCA 23 and TAA v TAB [2015] SGHCF1, all acknowledge that the reasonable decision of the primary carer to relocate is not “an insurmountable factor”. However, while the mother’s reasonable wishes were not determinative, it is nonetheless a factor to be considered in light of the tangible benefits relocation would have for her care of the children (UFZ v UFY [2018] 4 SLR 1350).
There is no presumption for or against relocation (UXH v UXI [2019] SGHCF 24). The court may refuse an application as a result of weighing up all the individual factors in the best interests of the child, since the welfare of the child outweighs all other considerations, however powerful and reasonable they may be. There are a multitude of factors when inquiring into the best interests of the child (including the child’s loss of relationship with the parent left behind, the child’s well-being in her present country of residence, the child’s developmental needs, including cognitive, emotional, academic and physical needs, as well as the child’s attachment to each parent).
However, where the factors weigh in favour of allowing relocation, the court will generally emphasise the importance of ensuring the left-behind parent has liberal access to the children to mitigate the impact of being physically apart (UFZ v UFY [2018] 4 SLR 1350).
What is your advice to parents who are thinking about relocating with a child?
They should have a well thought-out relocation plan which should include the following:
Housing and accommodation
Employment opportunities
Support network
Childcare arrangements
Facilitation of access to the left-behind parent
Other practical reasons why relocation should be ordered
What should parents know before starting a court procedure about child relocation?
International child relocation applications can be lengthy, and emotional intensive. It is important to equip oneself before starting the application.
What would you like to say to judges who handling child relocation cases?
We now live in a very global world and it is important to recognize that children can be incredibly adaptive, and it may be possible for children to have multiple homes and connections across the world.
What is your (practical) advice to parents, to make relocation easier for a child?
They should disclose relocation to the child at an appropriate time, remembering that children should have adequate time to adjust to change. As much as possible, they should aim to help to settle down the child by creating an environment which is stable and supportive, since change can be difficult for children.
Why is it interesting for you as a lawyer to work on these cases?
These cases are extremely difficult as there is often a race against time to apply for a return order back to the child’s home. Often it is the primary caregiver who abducts or removes the child when the relationship has broken down.
Child abduction cases, like international relocation cases can be white or black – return or stay; allow or disallow relocation. That can be very hard on parties, and ultimately the children, if there is a loss of relationship.
Which cases are you most concerned with?
I am most concerned with abduction to non-Hague convention countries. Such cases can be long and drawn out, because there is no Hague convention procedure in place. These cases can also be difficult as it can lead to a loss of relationship between the left behind parent and child, due to the length of proceedings.
