PEMPETISYEN L E N (F) 1. ) P E N 2. ) Y E N

PEMPETISYEN L E N (F) 1. ) P E N 2. ) Y E N

The Application to Intervene was allowed because the Proposed Intervener, as next friend, demonstrated a prima facie proprietary/pecuniary interest of the Child in the TR Property that would be directly affected by the matrimonial proceedings; the Respondent's failure to reply to the petition and his withdrawal from an agreed DNA test justified an adverse inference and supported intervention; under Rule 83 and Order 15 r6(2)(b)(ii) the court may add the Child's next friend to protect the Child's rights without deciding substantive trust issues at interlocutory stage.

Citation
WA-33-419-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: LEN; Respondent: PEN; Co Respondent: YEN; Proposed Intervener: MEN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 March 2025
Case Number
WA-33-419-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Separation Petition / Application to Intervene (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application by Proposed Intervener allowed (intervener to be made party as next friend of the Child)
Legal Topics
Intervention, Standing to Intervene, Paternity/dna Testing, Maintenance for Child, Proprietary/beneficial Interest, Consent Orders, Parens Patriae
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Child Law Civil Procedure Property Law Trusts Intervention Standing to Intervene Paternity/dna Testing +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LEN

Petitioner

PEN

Respondent

YEN

Co Respondent

MEN

Proposed Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Separation Petition / Application to Intervene (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Proposed Intervener (next friend) has sufficient interest to be joined
  2. 2 Whether the Child's proprietary or pecuniary rights in the TR Property will be directly affected by the matrimonial proceedings
  3. 3 Whether paternity is established or a prima facie case exists to justify intervention and a DNA order

Ratio Decidendi

The Application to Intervene was allowed because the Proposed Intervener, as next friend, demonstrated a prima facie proprietary/pecuniary interest of the Child in the TR Property that would be directly affected by the matrimonial proceedings; the Respondent's failure to reply to the petition and his withdrawal from an agreed DNA test justified an adverse inference and supported intervention; under Rule 83 and Order 15 r6(2)(b)(ii) the court may add the Child's next friend to protect the Child's rights without deciding substantive trust issues at interlocutory stage.

Court Disposition

Application by Proposed Intervener allowed (intervener to be made party as next friend of the Child)

Orders

  • Application to intervene by Proposed Intervener allowed and Proposed Intervener to be added as a party as next friend of the Child pursuant to Rule 83 and Order 15 r6(2)(b)(ii)
  • Costs awarded to the Proposed Intervener