SINGAPORE - The High Court has awarded the ex-wife of a business executive more than half of their matrimonial assets worth $13.8 million, stating that she had prioritised their children over her career.

In his judgment published on Thursday (Dec 19), Judicial Commissioner Tan Puay Boon said in dividing the assets, he also took into consideration the duration of the marriage and the man's failure to make full disclosure of his income and assets.

Among other things, the man did not submit his income tax statements for his employment in China, as well as supporting documentation of his insurance policies, Chinese bank accounts and overseas investments.

He also took $1.25 million of proceeds from the sale of a property which they had held jointly, but failed to account for the withdrawal.

They have been married for 35 years, and have four adult children. The man and his wife are both 62 years old.

In 2017, she filed for divorce after discovering that her husband had been having an affair.

An interim judgment was granted in February 2018, with issues of matrimonial asset division and maintenance left for the High Court to decide on Thursday.

The man had worked for a multinational corporation and other businesses, and was required to regularly travel for work. He was a senior director before he retired in 2017.

He subsequently came out of retirement to work on a contract basis in China, where he is now based.

The woman previously worked as a teacher and then at her family company. She last worked in an administrative role from 2014 to 2015.

In distributing the assets between the parties, Judicial Commissioner Tan eventually determined the ex-wife's share of the assets to be about $7.3 million.

As the portion of the assets currently held by the ex-wife amounted to about $3.3 million, he ordered the husband to transfer the shortfall of about $4 million to her.

However, he did not award the wife any maintenance.

Rejecting her proposal for a lump sum maintenance of $270,000, he stated that she already has a substantial share of the matrimonial assets, including a property at Robertson Quay which she was receiving rental income from.

She was also receiving financial support from her three older children.

He also pointed out that she would be receiving an additional $4 million from the man, as a result of the division of the matrimonial assets.

In relation to their youngest child, who is 21 years old, the Judicial Commissioner noted that both parties were willing to financially support the child's overseas university education.

He ordered them to collectively maintain the child and share the costs of her university expenses, but left it to the parties to determine the proportions of such maintenance.