The court emphasized that the welfare of the child is paramount in guardianship matters, deciding on custody based on the stability and care provided by both paternal grandparents and the mother as joint guardians.

[1] This is a love story that did not end happily ever after. However, there is an 'ever after' which the families of both the girl and the boy have to deal with and which result in them making applications to this Court for the resolution of their problem.

[2] The story begins with a boy Chan Shan Chern and a girl, Camille Yap. They were school mates at the Sri Garden School in Cheras. Later both Camille and Chan Shan Chern (Shan Chern) studied in Kolej Tunku Abdul Rahman. According to Camille in her affidavit in reply (affidavit jawapan), both she and Shan Chern started dating in the middle of 2009 where they became boyfriend and girlfriend. She was only 16 at that time. Their relationship was short lived that is, there were in relationship for about one year ie until either May or June 2010. Because of differences they broke up. At that time she was only 17 years old.

[3] At the time when they broke up Camille wasn't aware she was pregnant. She explained that she has irregular period and thought nothing of the fact that she did not have her period. She also attributed that not getting her period was stress related. Only after they broke up which was sometime in March, did she know she was pregnant in April 2010 and at that time she was 5 months pregnant. She told her parents and Shan Chern her ex-boyfriend and father of the unborn child she was carrying. Thereafter both parents met to discuss the problem of their college going children. At this point, l would like to mention that in the various affidavit filed, there were allegations and counter allegations made but of special importance was Camille's allegation that she was asked to abort the baby in China by Shan Chern's parents but she refused. On the other hand, Shan Chern's parents denied ever asking Camille to abort the baby. To my mind, the question of abortion may have possibly been mooted but nothing happened. There was no abortion and a child by the name of Ryan was born on 9 December 2010.

[4] By her own admission in her affidavit, Camille averred Shan Chern's parents had taken an active role during her pregnancy and had come to the hospital to visit her and baby Ryan was born. Camille alleged Shan Chern never visited Ryan in hospital.

[5] When Camille and Ryan were to be discharged a big problem arose. According to Camille and supported by her parents in their affidavits, they could not take Ryan home for 2 reasons:-

a) their house was under renovation;

b) they did not have a babysitter.

[6] Without going into detail, it is common ground and an undisputed fact that San Chern's parents (who are the paternal grandparents of Ryan) offered to take care of the problem. Camille admitted in her affidavit (paras 24 and 25 of Encl 6) that Shan Chern's parents offered to rent an apartment and to engage a confinement lady to take care of Camille and Ryan during her confinement. Camille and her parents agreed to this. So Camille and Ryan were in the apartment. It was not disputed that Shan Chern's parents paid for the rental of the apartment and the confinement lady.

[7] During confinement, it would appear that all grandparents visited mother and child. Except for allegations and denials of Camille's going out at night and also taking her bath at night, everything seemed to be okay. The issue of Camille going out was to score a point to show her lack of parental care to Ryan and this was of course vehemently denied by Camille. I must state here I have read all the affidavits o