PRABAKARAN A/L KRISHNAN ANNIE VIJAYA A/P KANDIAH PETER

PRABAKARAN A/L KRISHNAN ANNIE VIJAYA A/P KANDIAH PETER

The statutory presumption under s.88(3) LRMDA favouring the mother for a child below seven was not rebutted because RH failed to adduce compelling evidence of PW's unfitness or of a major mental illness; medical reports did not support RH's allegations and the welfare of the two‑year‑old child required continuity and maternal care. Accordingly sole custody was awarded to PW, access and maintenance orders were imposed and the marriage was dissolved.

Citation
AA-24F-58-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant (wife): Annie Vijaya A/P Kandiah Peter; Respondent (husband): Prabakaran A/L Krishnan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 April 2022
Case Number
AA-24F-58-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (custody, Access, Maintenance, Divorce) / Judgment
Outcome
Originating Summons No. AA-24F-58-09/2020 dismissed; Originating Summons No. AA-24F-63-09/2020 allowed; marriage dissolved; sole custody to Applicant (mother).
Legal Topics
Custody, Access (visitation), Maintenance Assessment, Presumption Under S.88(3) LRMDA, Mental Fitness Allegations, Burden of Proof, Reviewability of Custody Orders
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Child Custody Maintenance Divorce Guardianship of Infants Custody Access (visitation) Maintenance Assessment +4 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annie Vijaya A/P Kandiah Peter

Applicant (wife)

Prabakaran A/L Krishnan

Respondent (husband)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (custody, Access, Maintenance, Divorce) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rebuttable presumption under s.88(3) LRMDA in favour of the mother for children under seven is rebutted
  2. 2 Which parent should be granted sole custody having regard to the welfare of the child
  3. 3 Appropriate access arrangement for the non-custodial parent

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory presumption under s.88(3) LRMDA favouring the mother for a child below seven was not rebutted because RH failed to adduce compelling evidence of PW's unfitness or of a major mental illness; medical reports did not support RH's allegations and the welfare of the two‑year‑old child required continuity and maternal care. Accordingly sole custody was awarded to PW, access and maintenance orders were imposed and the marriage was dissolved.

Court Disposition

Originating Summons No. AA-24F-58-09/2020 dismissed; Originating Summons No. AA-24F-63-09/2020 allowed; marriage dissolved; sole custody to Applicant (mother).

Orders

  • Marriage between PW and RH dissolved and decree absolute to be made immediately under case No. AA-33-194-07/2021
  • PW granted sole custody, care and control of the child Ahiishkaran A/L Prabakaran; RH ordered to surrender and deliver the child to PW immediately