Abstract:
In WQX v WQW [2024] SGHCF 18, the court had the opportunity to consider whether proof beyond a reasonable doubt was necessary for proving adultery as a fact of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. While the court did not need to conclude on the appropriate standard, it did observe that proof beyond a reasonable doubt may not be necessary. This case comment argues that the appropriate standard is that of balance of probabilities: first, that the historical justification for proof beyond a reasonable doubt no longer holds true, and secondly, requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is commonly associated with criminal proceedings, undermines the concept of therapeutic justice.