B O O Y O O

B O O Y O O

The court found the tender years presumption rebutted on the evidence that the Plaintiff lacked financial stability, faced pursuit by debt collectors, had a pattern of unstable relocations and depended on external support; the Child was settled in a stable environment with the Defendant and his parents; disputed allegations against the Defendant were unsubstantiated in affidavit evidence. Consequently custody, care and control were awarded to the Defendant to protect the Child's welfare, guardianship was ordered jointly, and the Defendant was ordered to pay MYR750 monthly to the Plaintiff for incidental expenses during access, with a detailed access regime and control of identification...

Citation
WA-24F-186-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff Wife: BOO; Defendant Husband: YOO
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 December 2024
Case Number
WA-24F-186-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for sole custody dismissed; custody, care and control awarded to Defendant; guardianship awarded jointly; access and child maintenance ordered.
Legal Topics
Custody, Tender Years Doctrine, Welfare of the Child, Guardianship, Access/visitation, Child Maintenance
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Child Law Guardianship Maintenance Custody Tender Years Doctrine Welfare of the Child Access/visitation +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BOO

Plaintiff Wife

YOO

Defendant Husband

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Plaintiff entitled to sole custody, care and control of the child
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of tender years (s.88(3) Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976) was rebutted
  3. 3 Whether guardianship should be joint

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the tender years presumption rebutted on the evidence that the Plaintiff lacked financial stability, faced pursuit by debt collectors, had a pattern of unstable relocations and depended on external support; the Child was settled in a stable environment with the Defendant and his parents; disputed allegations against the Defendant were unsubstantiated in affidavit evidence. Consequently custody, care and control were awarded to the Defendant to protect the Child's welfare, guardianship was ordered jointly, and the Defendant was ordered to pay MYR750 monthly to the Plaintiff for incidental expenses during access, with a detailed access regime and control of identification...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for sole custody dismissed; custody, care and control awarded to Defendant; guardianship awarded jointly; access and child maintenance ordered.

Orders

  • Custody, care and control of the child awarded to the Defendant
  • Guardianship of the child to be joint between Plaintiff and Defendant