Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Welfare of the child

  • 26 Nov 2025

    GUOK NGUONG HWA TEOH WEI JU

    Citation
    DA-24F-5-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    DA-24F-5-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The court found the existence of the Interim Protection Order preventing the Plaintiff from approaching the child constituted a material change in circumstances that prejudiced the Plaintiff's ability to exercise custody and thereby justified varying the original custody order. The court accepted the urgent need for care, the suitability of the Defendant as the primary carer, and the child's reported contentment with the Defendant. Accordingly, custody was transferred to the Defendant and detailed access conditions for the Plaintiff were imposed pending revocation or termination of the Protec…

  • 23 Jul 2025

    LOW HUEI YING ANDREW GREGORY SEWELL

    Citation
    WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Order 29 requirements for ex parte interlocutory injunctions do not apply to committal leave under Order 52; the Defendant's Order 52 statement sufficiently particularised the alleged breaches and enabled the Plaintiff to meet the charge; dispensing with personal service in favor of service on solicitors was just given the parties' hostility and absence of prejudice; the Plaintiff wilfully and deliberately breached the Consent Order by enrolling the Child and curtailing access, therefore was in contempt; committal application was allowed though only a reprimand and costs were imposed given mi…

  • 23 Jul 2025

    LOW HUEI YING ANDREW GREGORY SEWELL

    Citation
    WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Order 52 is the governing framework for committal leave; the defendant's Order 52 statement sufficiently particularised breaches, service on the plaintiff's solicitors was justifiable and not prejudicial, and the plaintiff's unilateral enrollment of the child in school that curtailed the defendant's court-ordered access constituted a deliberate, wilful breach of the consent order amounting to contempt. The application to set aside was dismissed and the committal application was allowed; sanction limited to a formal reprimand and costs given mitigating considerations (motherhood).

  • 24 Jun 2025

    PEMPETISYEN 1. ) chua yee kuan 2. ) Joanne Kay Kuak Zhen Wen

    Citation
    BA-33-74-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-33-74-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    On balance of probabilities the mother proved a material change in the child's circumstances and relocation to Australia is in the child's best welfare: therefore the consent order is varied to grant both parents shared guardianship but sole custody, care and control to the mother with unsupervised reasonable access to the father and the father's consent for immediate relocation once arrangements are made.

  • 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.

  • 19 Mar 2025

    LOKE HONG FAI CHAN CHIU KHUK

    Citation
    BA-24F-211-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-24F-211-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The plaintiff failed to rebut the statutory presumption in Section 88(3) and failed to prove the defendant was an unfit mother; the child’s welfare and settled status quo with the mother weighed decisively in favour of the defendant, therefore custody, care and control is to remain with the mother.

  • 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…

  • 14 Oct 2024

    1. ) HENG CHOON LEE 2. ) WONG CHOON HOONG WONG CHOON HO

    Citation
    AA-24F-21-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-24F-21-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The court found that there has been a substantial change in circumstances (child's schooling, compulsory extracurricular activities, logistical travel burden and evidence of the child's unhappiness at the defendant's residence) such that the welfare of the child requires varying the access arrangement. The defendant's convenience does not override the child's welfare. Consequently the court granted the variation to supervised access at times that do not conflict with schooling, ordered Welfare Department assessments, set aside specified prior court orders except for costs, and made no order a…