PEMPETISYEN R I N 1. ) M I N 2. ) V I N

PEMPETISYEN R I N 1. ) M I N 2. ) V I N

Because the papers served were a Divorce Petition (not a court order) and there was no requirement for personal service, and because service was effected on the respondent's solicitors and alternatives (substituted service or dispensation) were available, the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of contempt; leave to commence committal proceedings was therefore refused and the application dismissed with costs.

Citation
WA-33-143-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: RIN; Respondent: MIN; Co Respondent: VIN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 September 2025
Case Number
WA-33-143-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition (matrimonial Proceedings) / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Commence Committal Proceedings Under O 52 R 3 ROC 2012; Dismissed (judgment for Appeal)
Outcome
Application for leave to commence committal proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Leave to Commence Committal Proceedings, Personal Service Vs Substituted Service, Evasion of Service, Anonymity of Parties
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Service of Process Leave to Commence Committal Proceedings Personal Service Vs Substituted Service Evasion of Service Anonymity of Parties

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RIN

Petitioner

MIN

Respondent

VIN

Co Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition (matrimonial Proceedings) / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Commence Committal Proceedings Under O 52 R 3 ROC 2012; Dismissed (judgment for Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to accept personal service of divorce petition amounts to contempt of court or interference with the administration of justice
  2. 2 Whether applicant established a prima facie case to justify leave to commence committal proceedings under O 52 r 3 ROC 2012
  3. 3 Whether personal service was necessary and whether alternative modes of service prevented prejudice to applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Because the papers served were a Divorce Petition (not a court order) and there was no requirement for personal service, and because service was effected on the respondent's solicitors and alternatives (substituted service or dispensation) were available, the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of contempt; leave to commence committal proceedings was therefore refused and the application dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to commence committal proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs of RM5,000.00 to Respondent subject to allocatur fee