SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 MarsdenLR 1924

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ROSE FERNANDEZ – Appellant
Versus
ANTHONY JOHN BOSCO PITCHAY – Respondent
[Divorce Petition No: WA-33-62-02/2021]



Petitioner Advocates:Sudesh Kumar ,Respondent Advocate: P Sevam

Court emphasized the duty of full financial disclosure in maintenance cases under matrimonial law, affecting maintenance decisions.

Headnote:1. The court considers the provisions of the Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules 1980 and the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976 regarding maintenance and asset disclosure for divorce proceedings. The petitioner sought maintenance pending divorce after showing the necessity due to the respondent's non-disclosure of financial assets. 2. Main issues included whether the respondent had disclosed income adequately, and the court’s responsibilities under ss 77 and 78 of the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act. The court emphasized the significance of full disclosure supported by precedent that necessitates good faith in matrimonial financial proceedings. 3. The court ordered the respondent to pay a monthly maintenance of MYR1,500, taking into consideration the petitioner’s dire financial needs and health condition, along with costs against the respondent amounting to MYR3,000.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's circumstances necessitate maintenance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. importance of full financial disclosure in maintenance. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. evaluation of maintenance based on needs and means. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. final ruling on maintenance amount ordered. (Para 20 , 21)
JUDGMENT

Evrol Mariette Peters J:

Introduction

[1] This was an application ("this Application") by the Petitioner wife in encl 65 under r 56(2)(a) of the Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules 1980 ("Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules") seeking, inter alia, maintenance pending divorce, and for the disclosure of the matrimonial assets on the part of the Respondent husband, to enable this Court to make a fair distribution of matrimonial assets, at the hearing of the divorce petition.

The Factual Background

[2] The Petitioner and Respondent aged 74 and 79 respectively, were married in September 1973, and had three children, one of whom had passed away in April 2020.

[3] The Petitioner had worked various jobs throughout the marriage, while the Respondent worked at the Ministry of Defence until his retirement, after which he operated a fitness centre to date.

[4] It was undisputed that throughout the marriage, it was the Petitioner who had assumed the primary role of caring for the family, raising the children, and attending to their needs, especially those of her late daughter, who had suffered from a severe disability.

[5] The Petitioner claimed to have suffered physically and emotionally due to the Respondent's alleged uncaring behaviour. In February 2021, unable to withstand anymore the strains of the marriage, the Petitioner filed a divorce petition ("the Divorce Petition"). The Petitioner then sought the assistance of her daughter and stayed with her during the time of the separation.

[6] In June 2022, Petitioner had filed this Application in its amended form, which was allowed in principle for the following reasons.

Contentions, Evaluation, And Findings

Whether Respondent Had Made Full And Frank Disclosure

[7] The starting point of this Application would be ss 77 and 78 of the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976 ("Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act "), both of which read:

Section 77 - Power for to order maintenance of spouse

(1) The Court may order a man to pay maintenance to his wife or former wife:

(a) during the course of any matrimonial proceedings;

(b) when granting or subsequent to the grant of a decree of divorce or judicial separation;

(c) if, after a decree declaring her presumed to be dead, she is found to be alive.

***

Section 78 - Assessment of maintenance

In determining the amount of any maintenance to be paid by a man to his wife or former wife or by a woman to her husband or former husband, the Court shall base its assessment primarily on the means and needs of the parties, regardless of the proportion such maintenance bears to the income of the husband or wife as the case may be, but shall have regard to the degree of responsibility which the Court apportions to each party for the breakdown of the marriage.

[Emphasis Added]

[8] In order for the Court to make an informed decision, rr 56 and 61 of the Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules which prescribe disclosure of full particulars of property and income. The provisions read:

Rule 56 - Application by petitioner or respondent for ancillary relief

(1) Any application by a petitioner, or by a respondent who files an answer claiming relief, for:

(a) an order for maintenance pending suit;

(b) a property division order, under s 76 of the Act; or

(c) a maintenance order, under s 77 of the Act,

shall be made in the petition or answer, as the case may be.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), an application for ancillary relief which should have been made in the petition or answer may be made subsequently:

(a) by leave of the Court, either by notice in Form 11 or at the trial; or

(b) where the parties are agreed upon the terms of the proposed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top