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

2009 MarsdenLR 386

(2010) 3 CLJ 361
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
SURAYA OTHMAN J

SIAH TEONG WOEI
Versus
JANET TRAYNOR

(DIVORCE PETITION NO: S8-33-789-2006)
Decided on : 8 OCTOBER 2009

JUDGMENT

Suraya Othman J:

Introduction

[1] This is an application of the respondent by way of summons in chamber in encl. 19 under O. 18 r. 19(1)(b), (c), and (d) Rules of the High Court 1980 ("RHC 1980") praying for the following order:

(1) that the petition herein be struck off;

(2) that the proceeding herein be dismissed with costs to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent;

(3) that the costs to and connected with the application herein be paid forthwith by the petitioner to the respondent; and

(4) for such further order or relief deemed fit by this honourable court.

[2] The respondent in her application laid down reasons and grounds for the application which are among others:

(a) that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 18 August 1989 in Weybridge, Surrey, England;

(b) that the respondent had presented a divorce petition in the Family Division of the High Court in England vide Matter No. KT05D00693 on 14 September 2005;

(c) that save for issues relating to the division of assets and custody of the child of marriage Darren Siah Li Xiang that remain outstanding, a decree nisi was ordered on 12 July 2007 in the English proceedings;

(d) that the respondent has left Malaysia and is no longer domicile in Malaysia;

(e) that respondent presently resides in Weybridge, Surrey, England;

(f) that the proceedings herein are frivolous, scandalous and/or are vexatious; and/or the proceedings herein will be an abuse of the court process; and

(g) that the proceedings herein will prejudice or embarrass the fair hearing and disposal of the English proceedings.

Facts And Background

[3] Siah Teong Woei ("the petitioner") was lawfully married to one Janet Traynor ("the respondent") on 18 August 1989 in Weybridge, Surrey, England. The petitioner is a citizen of Malaysia and the respondent a citizen of the United Kingdom. The parties then registered their marriage in Malaysia on 12 June 1990. The marriage was blessed with a son Darren who was born in Malaysia on 13 April 1994. The respondent and the petitioner was separated in 2002 and she and the child Darren returned to England the same year. Since then she was no longer domiciled in Malaysia since she and Darren never returned to Malaysia after that date. Darren attended school in England and the respondent took employment as a shop assistant to maintain herself and the child.

[4] On 14 September 2005 the respondent filed a divorce petition against the petitioner in the family division in the High Court of England. At all times the petitioner had acted under advice in the English proceedings and he has been fully aware of the proceedings in England. The petitioner then filed a divorce petition herein (in Malaysia) sometime in June 2006. On 20 April 2007, the High Court in England made an ex parte injunction order directing that the entire petitioner's property in Malaysia be frozen. On 23 May 2007 the petitioner obtained an ex parte order staying the proceeding of the divorce petition filed by him in Malaysia pending the disposal of the divorce proceedings in England. The High Court of England then granted a decree nisi of divorce on 12 July 2007. Subsequently on 5 October 2007 the respondent filed this summons in chambers to strike out the petitioner's divorce petition (present application, encl 19). The petitioner then filed a summons in chambers dated 19 March 2008 (encl 29) in this court to set aside his own stay order dated 23 May 2007. The petitioner further filed an application in this court for an anti-suit injunction by way of summons in chambers dated 9 April 2008 (encl 33) to restrain the respondent from proceeding with the English proceedings.

Judgment Of The Court

[5] Counsel for the respondent submitted that the petition for divorce filed in Malaysia in June 2006 should be struck off on the ground that a petition for divorce has already been filed in England on 14 September 2005, in which a decree nisi has been granted by the English Cour

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