PEMPETISYEN Abc Def

PEMPETISYEN Abc Def

Petitioner failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Respondent wilfully disobeyed Paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the Consent Order; 'consult and obtain views' did not require prior consent or presence of Petitioner, Respondent had informed and consulted Petitioner and acted on medical referrals, no clear opposing views requiring an expert were shown, therefore committal dismissed and costs awarded to Respondent.

Citation
BA-33JP-644-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner Husband: ABC; Petitioner Wife: DEF
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 January 2024
Case Number
BA-33JP-644-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Committal Proceeding for Contempt Under DMPR 1980 (breach of Consent Order) / Appeal From Dismissal of Committal Application (summons in Chambers; Original Application Dismissed)
Outcome
Committal application dismissed; costs awarded to Respondent.
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Consent Order Interpretation, Breach of Court Order, Medical Treatment of Children, Standard of Proof
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Contempt of Court Child Custody Divorce Law Committal Proceedings Consent Order Interpretation Breach of Court Order Medical Treatment of Children +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABC

Petitioner Husband

DEF

Petitioner Wife

Procedural Posture

Committal Proceeding for Contempt Under DMPR 1980 (breach of Consent Order) / Appeal From Dismissal of Committal Application (summons in Chambers; Original Application Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent wilfully disobeyed Paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the Consent Order
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner proved contempt beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Proper interpretation of 'consult and obtain views' in the consent order

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioner failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Respondent wilfully disobeyed Paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the Consent Order; 'consult and obtain views' did not require prior consent or presence of Petitioner, Respondent had informed and consulted Petitioner and acted on medical referrals, no clear opposing views requiring an expert were shown, therefore committal dismissed and costs awarded to Respondent.

Court Disposition

Committal application dismissed; costs awarded to Respondent.

Orders

  • Committal application dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Respondent Wife