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

2024 MarsdenLR 65

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
MPPL & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
CAS – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Foo Yet Ngo,Kiran Dhaliwal,Yu Yi Lin ,Respondent Advocate: Tay Kit Hoo

Judgement Key Points

Question 1? Question 2? Question 3?

Key Points: - The judgment holds that legitimacy and paternity are distinct but interconnected concepts, and s 112 EA does not bar paternity inquiries but requires consideration of "no access" before ordering a DNA test. (!) (!) (!) - The court concludes that the right to know a child’s biological parents is not the paramount consideration; best interests/welfare of the child remains central in deciding whether to order DNA testing. (!) (!) (!) - There is no statutory power in Malaysia to compel DNA testing in civil proceedings; parens patriae powers are circumscribed and must be grounded in written law, with the welfare of the child as the primary consideration. (!) (!) (!)

Question 1?

Question 2?

Question 3?


JUDGMENT

Zabariah Mohd Yusof FCJ:

Introduction

[1] This is an appeal by the defendants against the decision of the Court of Appeal which affirmed the decision of the High Court. The High Court allowed the application by the plaintiff (who claims to be the biological father of a child), for an order, inter alia, to compel a DNA test to be done on a child to determine the paternity of the same.

[2] On 8 August 2023, the Federal Court granted leave to the defendants to appeal premised upon the following seven questions of law:

(1) Whether legitimacy and paternity are two (2) distinct concepts, taking into consideration the recent Federal Court decision in Leow Fook Keong (L) v. Pendaftar Besar Bagi Kelahiran Dan Kematian Malaysia, Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, Malaysia & Anor, [2022] 1 CLJ 23 which compels information in birth certificates to be corrected or amended to reflect available evidence and facts.

(2) Whether s 112 of the Evidence Act 1950 , being an evidential construct, would apply to confer legitimacy on a child born during the subsistence of a lawful marriage even where there is scientific evidence available that the said child is the biological child of another male.

(3) What

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top