STEPHANIE TAN MIN CHU ... RESPONDENT LAIN-LAIN 1. ) ROBERT STEVENSON KAY ... PETITIONER 2. ) NEIL VALENTINE CULPAN ... CO-RESPONDENT

STEPHANIE TAN MIN CHU ... RESPONDENT LAIN-LAIN 1. ) ROBERT STEVENSON KAY ... PETITIONER 2. ) NEIL VALENTINE CULPAN ... CO-RESPONDENT

The application to strike out was dismissed because the Court granted the s106 exemption given exceptional circumstances rendering referral impracticable, the intitulement requirement for originating summons does not apply to divorce petitions and the petitioner proved he had abandoned his UK domicile and acquired a Malaysian domicile of choice so the Court had jurisdiction; accordingly the petition was not scandalous, frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process.

Citation
WA-33-123-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner Husband: Robert Stevenson Kay; Respondent Wife: Stephanie Tan Min Chiu; Co Respondent: Neil Valentine Culpan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 July 2020
Case Number
WA-33-123-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce / Decision on Strike Out Application
Outcome
Respondent wife's application to strike out the divorce petition is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Striking Out, Conciliation Requirement S106 LRA, Intitulement and Originating Processes, Domicile and Jurisdiction, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Matrimonial Law Civil Procedure Private International Law Striking Out Conciliation Requirement S106 LRA Intitulement and Originating Processes Domicile and Jurisdiction +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Stevenson Kay

Petitioner Husband

Stephanie Tan Min Chiu

Respondent Wife

Neil Valentine Culpan

Co Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Decision on Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether petitioner complied with s106 LRA (referral to conciliatory body) or validly obtained exemption
  2. 2 Whether the intitulement on a divorce petition must state the written law under ROC/1980 Rules
  3. 3 Whether petitioner had acquired a domicile of choice in Malaysia such that the High Court had jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out was dismissed because the Court granted the s106 exemption given exceptional circumstances rendering referral impracticable, the intitulement requirement for originating summons does not apply to divorce petitions and the petitioner proved he had abandoned his UK domicile and acquired a Malaysian domicile of choice so the Court had jurisdiction; accordingly the petition was not scandalous, frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Respondent wife's application to strike out the divorce petition is dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondent wife to pay petitioner costs of RM2,000 subject to allocatur fee
  • Divorce petition remains extant and proceedings continue