This case sets a precedent for evaluating judicial separation petitions, emphasizing the need for proving unreasonable behavior and outlining the Court's power under the Law Reform Act.

Introduction

[1] This is a petition for judicial separation ("JS") filed by the petitioner wife ("PW") against the respondent husband ("RH") under s 64 of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 ("LRA").

[2] PW and RH's marriage was registered under the LRA on 18 July 1997. They underwent a Chinese customary marriage earlier on 2 November 1996. There are two children of the marriage, TJM (born on 5 June 1997) and TJT (born on 3 June 1999).

[3] After 18 years of marriage, PW left the matrimonial home on 23 November 2015 without RH's knowledge. She took both children with her.

[4] PW had filed this JS petition against RH in the Kuala Lumpur High Court on 23 October 2015 - exactly a month prior to leaving the matrimonial home.

[5] The JS petition was served on RH on the same day PW left the matrimonial home with their children. The petition was served together with an ex-parte Interim Injunction Order dated 17 November 2015 freezing half of all RH's bank accounts. An Ad Interim Injunction Order was granted on 30 November 2015.

[6] On 24 June 2016, the High Court dismissed PW's application for an interim injunction and allowed RH's application to set aside the Ad Interim Injunction Order. On 27 June 2016, PW's appealed the High Court's decision to the Court of Appeal. She also applied for an Erinford injunction on an ex-parte basis. The ex-parte Erinford injunction was granted on 30 June 2016. After the inter partes hearing of the application, the High Court dismissed PW's application for the Erinford injunction on 8 August 2016.

[7] A Consent Order between PW and RH was recorded at the Court of Appeal on 28 October 2016, where it was ordered with the consent of the parties that half of the balance in seven of RH's bank accounts be frozen and that RH would maintain the sum of RM33 million in a fixed deposit at Public Bank Berhad pending the disposal of this JS petition.

Reliefs Sought

[8] In this JS Petition, PW seeks an order of judicial separation. She is also seeking custody, care and control of TJM and TJT, a reasonable sum in monthly maintenance for both children until they each complete their tertiary education and payment of all their expenses until completion of their first degree.

[9] In addition, PW seeks a reasonable sum of monthly maintenance for herself and for a portion of the assets acquired by the parties during their marriage, divided in such proportion between her and RH as this Court thinks just. The assets in question are substantial. As detailed in Part D of this judgment, the assets amount to more than a quarter billion ringgit.

[10] RH is his cross-petition seeks for a dissolution of the marriage. RH seeks for the division of assets and payments of maintenance in the sums detailed in his counsel's written submission filed in Court after the conclusion of trial.

Issues For Determination

[11] The issues for a Court's determination in a JS petition are similar to that in a divorce petition. They are:

(a) whether the marriage had irretrievably broken down and what are the facts that caused or led to the breakdown of the marriage;

(b) maintenance for the spouse and the children; and

(c) division of matrimonial assets.

[12] This Court is empowered under the LRA to make ancillary orders relating to the custody of the children of a marriage when granting a decree of judicial separation or decree of divorce. It is also empowered to order payment of maintenance for the children.

[13] The custody and care of both children of the marriage is not an issue in this case, as both TJM and TJT are over 18 years of age.

[14] However, the maintenance of both children remains