PEMPETISYEN R RENUGA RAMAYAH RAMESH SENGARAN

PEMPETISYEN R RENUGA RAMAYAH RAMESH SENGARAN

Petitioner failed to prove on the balance of probabilities a material change in circumstances warranting variation of the consent access order; the welfare principle and the presumption against disturbing consent orders required maintaining the original supervised access order, therefore the variation application was dismissed.

Citation
BA-33-382-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: R. RENUGA A/P RAMAYAH; Respondent: RAMESH A/L SENGARAN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 July 2023
Case Number
BA-33-382-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition (petisyen Perceraian) / Application to Vary Decree Nisi/order Under Ss96 and 97 Lra; High Court Decision Dismissing Variation Application (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Petitioner’s application to vary the access order (Encl 117) dismissed
Legal Topics
Variation of Custody/access Orders, Supervised Access, Welfare of the Child, Material Change in Circumstances, Consent Orders, Burden of Proof
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Matrimonial Law Child Custody Maintenance Variation of Custody/access Orders Supervised Access Welfare of the Child Material Change in Circumstances +2 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 7 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R. RENUGA A/P RAMAYAH

Petitioner

RAMESH A/L SENGARAN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition (petisyen Perceraian) / Application to Vary Decree Nisi/order Under Ss96 and 97 Lra; High Court Decision Dismissing Variation Application (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a material change in circumstances to justify varying the access order
  2. 2 Whether the child's wishes should be decisive in varying access
  3. 3 Whether the consent order should be varied given the balance of probabilities and evidential record

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioner failed to prove on the balance of probabilities a material change in circumstances warranting variation of the consent access order; the welfare principle and the presumption against disturbing consent orders required maintaining the original supervised access order, therefore the variation application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Petitioner’s application to vary the access order (Encl 117) dismissed

Orders

  • Application under Encl 117 dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • Decree Nisi and Order dated 31.10.2022 (sole guardianship and Clause 3 supervised access every Saturday 5pm–7pm at public place) remains in force.