PAULINE CHAI SIEW PHIN vs KHOO KAY PENG

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2014 MarsdenLR 781

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PAULINE CHAI SIEW PHIN – Appellant
Versus
KHOO KAY PENG – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Malik Imtiaz Sarwar,K Shanmuga,Pavendeep Singh,Chan Wei June,Aston Paiva ,Respondent Advocate: YN Foo,Kiran Dhaliwal

Table of Content
1. introduction of divorce proceedings (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. stay application based on forum non conveniens (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. finding of irretrievable breakdown of marriage (Para 13 , 14)
4. historical background of the parties (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
5. tests for appropriate forum (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)

[1] The appellant (wife) instituted divorce proceedings between the parties by filing in the English High Court on 14 February 2013 and on 18 February 2013 the wife obtained an ex parte non-molestation and occupation against the husband allowing her sole occupation of Rossway House and preventing the husband from going 50 metres of Rossway House.

[2] The respondent (husband) was served with the English Petition on 18 February 2013 at 6pm. On 25 February 2013 the wife amended the petition and this was served on 27 February 2013. The husband lodged an acknowledgment of service to the petition on 27 February 2013 and contests jurisdiction of the English High Court. On the same day, the husband files encl 1 in the Malaysian High Court on the same day.

[3] Enclosure 1 is the husband's ex parte applicatio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 MarsdenLR 781

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAPAULINE CHAI SIEW PHIN – AppellantVersusKHOO KAY PENG – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PAULINE CHAI SIEW PHIN – Appellant
Versus
KHOO KAY PENG – Respondent