PEMPETISYEN 1. ) WONG YEOW JOE 2. ) CHOO PEI YI

PEMPETISYEN 1. ) WONG YEOW JOE 2. ) CHOO PEI YI

Applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that there was any material change of circumstances or misrepresentation justifying variation; allegations of neglect and injury were uncorroborated by medical reports; evidence showed applicant had misused access; presumption under s.88(3) and the best interests of the young children favoured continuation of current arrangements; application dismissed.

Citation
JA-33JP-296-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Pempetisyen Suami: WONG YEOW JOE; Pempetisyen Isteri: CHOO PEI YI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 June 2023
Case Number
JA-33JP-296-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition and Application to Vary Custody Order Under S.96, Law Reform (marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 / Hearing and Judgment on Application to Vary Decree Nisi (kandungan 10)
Outcome
Kandungan 10 dismissed without order as to costs
Legal Topics
Variation of Custody Order, Decree Nisi, Best Interests of the Child, Material Change of Circumstances Under S.96, Presumption Favouring Mother Under S.88(3)
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Child Custody Domestic Relations Variation of Custody Order Decree Nisi Best Interests of the Child Material Change of Circumstances Under S.96 Presumption Favouring Mother Under S.88(3)

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG YEOW JOE

Pempetisyen Suami

CHOO PEI YI

Pempetisyen Isteri

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition and Application to Vary Custody Order Under S.96, Law Reform (marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 / Hearing and Judgment on Application to Vary Decree Nisi (kandungan 10)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in circumstances to justify varying the custody order under s.96
  2. 2 Whether the applicant proved misrepresentation or mistake of fact when the decree nisi was recorded
  3. 3 Application of the rebuttable presumption under s.88(3] in relation to young children and mother custody

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that there was any material change of circumstances or misrepresentation justifying variation; allegations of neglect and injury were uncorroborated by medical reports; evidence showed applicant had misused access; presumption under s.88(3) and the best interests of the young children favoured continuation of current arrangements; application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Kandungan 10 dismissed without order as to costs

Orders

  • Kandungan 10 dismissed without order as to costs