PEMPETISYEN CHONG MENG LEE 1. ) TEE TAI HONG 2. ) ONG YEE LING

PEMPETISYEN CHONG MENG LEE 1. ) TEE TAI HONG 2. ) ONG YEE LING

Because the JSP named the 2nd Respondent as the alleged adulterous party but sought no relief against her, the pleading was plainly and obviously unsustainable, frivolous and vexatious and constituted an abuse of process; moreover the petitioner’s prolonged delay and continued cohabitation evidenced tolerance of the adultery undermining her entitlement to relief under s54(1)(a) LRA 1976, so the strike out application succeeded.

Citation
BA-33-125-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner Wife: Chong Meng Lee; Respondent Husband: Tee Tai Hong; 2nd Respondent: Ong Yee Ling
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 September 2024
Case Number
BA-33-125-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Separation Petition / Interlocutory Strike Out Application Decided; Appeal Filed
Outcome
Application in Enclosure 19 allowed; proceedings against 2nd Respondent struck out; Enclosure 39 (application to amend) struck off
Legal Topics
Judicial Separation, Striking Out Pleadings, Abuse of Process, Adultery, Amendment of Pleadings
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Matrimonial Law Civil Procedure Judicial Separation Striking Out Pleadings Abuse of Process Adultery Amendment of Pleadings

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chong Meng Lee

Petitioner Wife

Tee Tai Hong

Respondent Husband

Ong Yee Ling

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Separation Petition / Interlocutory Strike Out Application Decided; Appeal Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether naming the 2nd Respondent without seeking relief renders the pleading frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner’s delay and continued cohabitation undermine her claim that adultery made living together intolerable under s54(1)(a) LRA 1976
  3. 3 Whether affidavits can be used to enlarge pleadings or rescue defective plaints

Ratio Decidendi

Because the JSP named the 2nd Respondent as the alleged adulterous party but sought no relief against her, the pleading was plainly and obviously unsustainable, frivolous and vexatious and constituted an abuse of process; moreover the petitioner’s prolonged delay and continued cohabitation evidenced tolerance of the adultery undermining her entitlement to relief under s54(1)(a) LRA 1976, so the strike out application succeeded.

Court Disposition

Application in Enclosure 19 allowed; proceedings against 2nd Respondent struck out; Enclosure 39 (application to amend) struck off

Orders

  • Enclosure 19 (2nd Respondent’s application to strike out JSP) allowed and the JSP struck out as against the 2nd Respondent
  • Enclosure 39 (Petitioner’s application for leave to amend JSP to add relief against 2nd Respondent) struck off