Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Guardianship

  • 28 Jul 2025

    JEYARINE MONICA JOAN POOBAL ROYAN KUMARESAN A/L SOUNDARARAJAN

    Citation
    BA-24F-108-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-24F-108-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Given the child's age (under seven), the recent Level 2 ASD diagnosis, the need for stability, continuity of therapy and preschool routine, and the Plaintiff's position as primary caregiver, the court awarded joint guardianship and custody with physical care and control to the Plaintiff; limited Defendant's unsupervised access to Wednesdays 4:00–8:00 pm and overnight access on alternate weekends (Saturday 10:00 am to Sunday 7:00 pm) with no interstate travel without prior written consent; ordered child maintenance RM1,500/month payable from February 2023 with a 5% increase every two years and…

  • 16 Jul 2025

    PEMPETISYEN K E E N E E

    Citation
    WA-33-32-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-33-32-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Because the petitioner failed the means-and-needs test for spousal maintenance and framed relief inconsistently, Enclosure 9 for spousal maintenance was dismissed; however statutory duty under ss92-93 required child maintenance and, on the undisputed evidence, respondent was ordered to pay MYR1,500 per child per month and bear education and medical expenses; both parents were appointed joint guardians (Guardianship of Infants Act s5) while custody, care and control were vested in the petitioner (Law Reform Act s88(3)); there was insufficient, untested evidence to restrict respondent to superv…

  • 5 May 2025

    PEMPETISYEN WONG SHU FUNG 1. ) ALARIC LAU HON PHUNG 2. ) MELISSA LOKE MEI LIN

    Citation
    BA-33-456-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-33-456-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Given the paramountcy of the children’s welfare, credible contemporaneous evidence (photographs, WhatsApp messages, police report and IPO) of physical abuse by the Petitioner towards child K, together with the children’s clear and independent preference to remain with their father, justified granting joint guardianship but awarding physical care and control to the Respondent Husband with reasonable alternate‑weekend access to the Petitioner.

  • 5 May 2025

    ALARIC LAU HON PHUNG WONG SHU FUNG

    Citation
    BA-24F-69-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-24F-69-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Applying the paramount welfare principle, the court found the evidence of physical abuse of child K by the mother credible (photographs, WhatsApp messages, police report), the children (age 12 and 9) independently expressed a clear wish to remain with their father, and the father's care provided a stable environment; therefore joint guardianship and custody were appropriate but physical care and control was awarded to the father pending final disposal, with reasonable access to the mother.

  • 29 Apr 2025

    XXXX K E N

    Citation
    WA-24F-212-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-212-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Counterclaim for joint guardianship and joint custody dismissed because Defendant demonstrated prolonged disengagement and lack of genuine involvement, and granting joint custody would jeopardize the child's welfare; access granted limitedly and subject to child's consent; claim for arrears dismissed due to lengthy unexplained delay and apparent strategic motive by mother; Defendant ordered to pay monthly maintenance MYR2,500 with 10% annual increment until completion of tertiary education and to contribute 30% of tertiary education costs if required.

  • 21 Feb 2025

    R A H R A L

    Citation
    WA-24F-190-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-190-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    In the absence of statutory recognition of embryos as persons and lacking any written agreements, the Court held embryos are neither persons nor ordinary property; control of the two frozen embryos was awarded to the Applicant because she bore primary financial responsibility for their preservation, but that control was conditional to protect the Respondent from involuntary parenthood and financial liability. Lump‑sum maintenance was refused as impermissible and impractical under the Guardianship of Infants Act; periodic maintenance of MYR1,500 monthly (with 10% annual increment) was ordered,…

  • 2 Dec 2024

    B O O Y O O

    Citation
    WA-24F-186-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-186-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    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…

  • 2 Dec 2024

    R O S M O S

    Citation
    WA-24F-200-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-200-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The application to cross-examine was dismissed because it was filed with unjustified delay and the Plaintiff had adduced sufficient contemporaneous documentary evidence on key issues such that cross-examination was unnecessary; the Defendant failed to show that cross-examination was required to resolve material disputes and failed to discharge the burden of proof for his allegations, therefore the court exercised its discretion to refuse leave.

  • 25 Apr 2024

    SOLAIMUTHARASAN A/L SITARAMAN MENAGA A/P VELATHYAN

    Citation
    NA-24F-116-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    NA-24F-116-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The court applied the paramount welfare principle, found that joint guardianship was appropriate under the Guardianship of Infants Act, but that care, control and custody should remain with the mother as primary caregiver given the children's ages (one under seven and one with ADHD), the mother's proven caregiving role, absence of medical evidence supporting the father's allegations of the mother's incapacity, and unchallenged evidence of domestic violence by the father. Accordingly the father's application for sole decision-making was dismissed; the father was granted structured access, orde…

  • 19 Feb 2024

    H E K I N G

    Citation
    WA-24F-113-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-113-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Joint guardianship was awarded but custody, care and control were granted to the Respondent because the children had continuously resided with him and removal would disrupt their welfare; the presumption under s88(3) was rebutted on balance of probabilities by the established facts of primary caregiving and stability; Applicant was granted liberal access, minimal spousal maintenance (MYR250 monthly) based on means and needs, shared responsibility for children's expenses and half of the proven mobile bill (MYR1,500).