ANCLLARY ORDERS ANCLLARY ORDERS

ON DVORCE ON DVORCE
Topic 3 Topic 3

, For Muslim , For Muslim
ntroduction ntroduction
M,inten,nce M,inten,nce
Mahr Mahr ,nd gift ,nd gift
Mutaah Mutaah
Jointly ,cquired property Jointly ,cquired property
- For Non Muslim - For Non Muslim
ntroduction ntroduction
M,inten,nce M,inten,nce
Distri-ution of property Distri-ution of property
3 3
4 4
ntroduction ntroduction
S.55 FLA S.55 FLA No record of the No record of the
pronouncement of t,l,q @ order of div pronouncement of t,l,q @ order of div
@ ,nnulment of mrrg m,y -e registered @ ,nnulment of mrrg m,y -e registered
unless the Registr,r is s,tisfied th,t the unless the Registr,r is s,tisfied th,t the
court h,s m,de , fin,l order rel,ting court h,s m,de , fin,l order rel,ting
thereto. thereto.
5 5
m,inten,nce m,inten,nce
At Talaq: 6 At Talaq: 6
'.let the woman live in iddah in the '.let the woman live in iddah in the
same style as you live according to your same style as you live according to your
means, annoy them not so as to restrict means, annoy them not so as to restrict
them. And if they carry life in their them. And if they carry life in their
wombs then spend your substance on wombs then spend your substance on
them until they deliver their burden.` them until they deliver their burden.`
6 6
S.65 FLA S.65 FLA Right of divorced W to Right of divorced W to
receive m,inten,nce from her former H receive m,inten,nce from her former H
under ,ny order of the ct sh,ll ce,se on under ,ny order of the ct sh,ll ce,se on
the expiry of the period of the expiry of the period of //ah //ah @ the W @ the W
-eing -eing nusyuz. nusyuz.
7 7
t is usual Ior the Shariah Court in Malaysia t is usual Ior the Shariah Court in Malaysia
to order payment oI maintenance Ior the to order payment oI maintenance Ior the
period oI iddah by the H to the W and iI H period oI iddah by the H to the W and iI H
does not make such payment does not make such payment, or iI , or iI W is not W is not
satisIied with the amount awarded, satisIied with the amount awarded, she can she can
apply to the court Ior an order Ior apply to the court Ior an order Ior
maintenance. maintenance.
I W proves that the H has Iailed to pay her I W proves that the H has Iailed to pay her
maintenance during the period oI marriage, maintenance during the period oI marriage,
Shariah court can make an order Ior the Shariah court can make an order Ior the
payment oI the payment oI the past maintainence past maintainence..
8 8
earned ChieI Qadhi in earned ChieI Qadhi in Noor Bee v Noor Bee v
Ahmad Shanusi |1978| JH (2)63 Ahmad Shanusi |1978| JH (2)63 said said
that the maintenance Ior a W that the maintenance Ior a W does not does not
lapse lapse but iI not claimed it becomes a debt but iI not claimed it becomes a debt
due Irom H to W. This is the ruling oI due Irom H to W. This is the ruling oI
mam ShaIi`i and W in the ruling mam ShaIi`i and W in the ruling
includes a divorced, W Ior the period oI includes a divorced, W Ior the period oI
iddah. iddah.
9 9
S61 A S61 A- - Assessment oI maintenance. Assessment oI maintenance.
n determining the amount oI any maintenance to be n determining the amount oI any maintenance to be
paid, the Court shall base its assessment primarily paid, the Court shall base its assessment primarily
on the means and needs oI the parties, regardless oI on the means and needs oI the parties, regardless oI
the proportion the maintenance bears to the income the proportion the maintenance bears to the income
oI the person against whom the order is made oI the person against whom the order is made
(proportion mb base on husbd means n status eg 1/3 (proportion mb base on husbd means n status eg 1/3
oI 2000 or 1/3 oI 800 oI 2000 or 1/3 oI 800 the bigger the income the the bigger the income the
bigger the apportionment) bigger the apportionment)
The amount oI maintenance depends on the The amount oI maintenance depends on the
standard oI living oI the parties whether they are standard oI living oI the parties whether they are
rich, poor or middle class. rich, poor or middle class.
The right oI divorced W to maintenance will be lost The right oI divorced W to maintenance will be lost
iI she is nusyuz iI she is nusyuz
10 10
!ower oI Court to order maintenance oI !ower oI Court to order maintenance oI
wiIe the eIIect oI nusyuz. wiIe the eIIect oI nusyuz.
S.59 S.59
(1)The Court may, subject to (1)The Court may, subject to ukum ukum
Syara Syara, order a man to pay maintenance to , order a man to pay maintenance to
his wiIe or his wiIe or Iormer wiIe Iormer wiIe..
11 11
(2) Subject to (2) Subject to ukum Syara ukum Syara and conIirmation and conIirmation
by the Court, a by the Court, a wiIe shall not be entitled to wiIe shall not be entitled to
maintenance maintenance when she is when she is nusyu: nusyu:, or , or
unreasonably reIuses to obey the lawIul wishes unreasonably reIuses to obey the lawIul wishes
or commands oI her husband, that is to say, or commands oI her husband, that is to say,
inter alia inter alia- -
a) a) when she leaves her husbands home when she leaves her husbands home
against his will; or against his will; or
b) b) when she withholds her association when she withholds her association
with her husband; with her husband;
c) c) when she reIuses to move with him to when she reIuses to move with him to
another home or place, another home or place,
without any valid reason without any valid reason according to according to ukum ukum
Syara Syara. .
1 1
(3) As soon as the wiIe (3) As soon as the wiIe repents repents
and and obeys obeys the lawIul wishes the lawIul wishes
and commands oI her husband, and commands oI her husband,
she ceases to be she ceases to be nusyu: nusyu:..
(w not obliged to obey (w not obliged to obey husbd husbd iI iI
he acted he acted acted acted against the against the
hukum hukum syarak syarak eg eg he disallow w he disallow w
to pray, Iast to pray, Iast ect ect) )
13 13
#ight to maintenance or pemberian aIter divorce. #ight to maintenance or pemberian aIter divorce.
1. 1. The right oI a divorced wiIe to receive The right oI a divorced wiIe to receive
maintenance Irom her Iormer husband under any maintenance Irom her Iormer husband under any
order oI Court shall cease on the order oI Court shall cease on the expiry oI the expiry oI the
period oI period oI iddah iddah or on the wiIe being or on the wiIe being nusyu: nusyu:.|Act .|Act
A902| A902|
2. 2. The right oI a divorced wiIe to receive a The right oI a divorced wiIe to receive a pemberian pemberian
Irom her Iormer husband under an agreement shall Irom her Iormer husband under an agreement shall
cease on her cease on her remarriage remarriage. (Act A902 . (Act A902) )
14 14
ShariIah Sapoyah v Wan Alwi ShariIah Sapoyah v Wan Alwi- - Sarawak |1988| Sarawak |1988|
6 JH 259 6 JH 259
#okiah v Mohamed dris #okiah v Mohamed dris- -T|1986| 6 JH 272 T|1986| 6 JH 272
Jinah v Abdul Aziz Jinah v Abdul Aziz- -T|1986| 6 JH 344 T|1986| 6 JH 344
!iah v Che ah !iah v Che ah- -!enang (1983) 3 JH 220 !enang (1983) 3 JH 220
#ahmah Bee v Mohamed YusoII (1979) 1 JH #ahmah Bee v Mohamed YusoII (1979) 1 JH
(2) 75 (2) 75
Haji Abdullah v Cik Bon (1977) 3 JH 110 Haji Abdullah v Cik Bon (1977) 3 JH 110
Salma v Mat Akhir (1985) 5 JH 161 Salma v Mat Akhir (1985) 5 JH 161
W Sharifah Sapoyah v Wan AIwi [1988] 6 JH 259
W The w cl,im sh,re on HP on hse n l,nd
W The cl,im w,s dismiss -y the crt
W Crt held the w w,s un,-le to give p,rticul,rs of the l,nd
n its title
W Hus-d denied the existence of the prop
W Crt relied on annat at-Tal-n in reg,rds to necessity to
,dduce evidence of loc,tion n ,re, of l,nd
W The crt ,lso dismissed w cl,im on toyot, c,r -ut ,llowed
the w cl,im on TV set, fridge, w,shing m,chine n ford
escort c,r which hus-d ,dmitted ,s HP
W Crt g,ve one third of v,lue of prop to the wife
W #okiah v Mohamed Idris [1986] 6 JH 272
W Wife contri-ution in looking ,fter the household
W n this c,se, the crt h,d dismissed the wife's
cl,im for h,rt, sepenc,ri,n HP on the grd th,t
the prop in Q were ,cquired -y the hus-d with
his own money
W Wife ,ppe,l
W Fed Territory of Sy,ri,h Bo,rd of Appe,l
,llowed the ,ppe,l n held th,t wife's indirect
contri-ution to the ,cquisition of prop ,cquired
during the m,rri,ge, exists.
W Looking ,fter the hse hold n f,mily m-
considered ,s HP
W Jinah v AbduI Aziz-FT[1986] 6 JH 344
W The w who h,d -een div cl,imed
m,inten,nce for the period of edd,h
W t ,ppe,red however ,t the tri,l th,t the
,greed m,inten,nce h,s -een p,id
W The wife ,dmitted to this f,cts
W Held she w,s -ound -y her ,dmission n
the cl,im for m,inten,nce w,s dismissed
W !iah v Che Lah-!enang (1983) 3 JH 220
W Distinction -etween HP n H,rt, perkongsi,n
W Crt o-served th,t HP is jointly ,cquired prop
,cquired during their life together reg,rdless
whether the contri-ution is in the s,me form or
not m,teri,l or not, whether form,lly or
inform,lly
W HP therefore is different with h,rt, perkongsi,n
p,rtnership prop
W p,rtnership prop is ,cquired -y the p,rtners
who sh,re the c,pit,l to ,cquire the prop
n this c,se the hus-d did not contest the
wife's cl,im for HP ie the m,trimoni,l
home ,nd w,s willing to tr,nsfer the prop
solely in wife's n,me provided th,t she
p,id him the price for his h,lf-sh,re in the
l,nd
W #ahmah Bee v Mohamed Yusoff (1979) 1 JH
(2) 75
W The sy,ri,h crt dismissed the cl,im of div wife
for m,inten,nce ,s it is of the opinion th,t in the
circumst,nces, the order m,de ,t the time of
divorce for p,yment of $50 ,s idd,h
m,inten,nce could -e ,ccepted ,s ,-solute
minimum crt opined th,t it could -e lower th,n
th,t, looking ,t the needs n me,ns of the hus-d
W Haji AbduIIah v Cik Bon (1977) 3 JH 110
W The div w cl,imed th,t she h,d -een div -y her
h n cl,imed edd,h m,inten,nce
W The hus-d did not ,ttend the tri,l n the Sy,ri,h
crt ,fter he,ring the div w n her witnesses ,sked
the w to t,ke ,n o,th to swe,r th,t she h,s -een
div ,nd th,t her hus-d h,s not revoke the div,
th,t the hus-d h,s not p,id the edd,h
m,inten,nce to her ,nd th,t she h,s not -een
nusyuz to her hus-d
W The w cl,imed m,inten,nce ,t the r,te of
$5 , d,y for 100 d,ys - 3 mths n g,ve
det,ils of the hsehold expenditure
W The le,rned judge ,ccepted the evidence
n ordered the hus-d to p,y $500
m,inten,nce
W The hus-d ,ppe,l to Sy,ri,h Crt of Appe,l
-ut his ,ppe,l w,s dismissed
W SaIma v Mat Akhir (1985) 5 JH 161
W The div w cl,imed m,inten,nce ,mounting to
$800
W The w c,lled witness -ut one of them w,s her
f,ther. The f,ther is not ,llowed to testify ,s
witness for fe,r of -eing -i,s tow,rds his
d,ughter
W The w took ,n o,th to s,y th,t she h,d not
received the m,inten,nce ,nd th,t she h,d not
-een guilty of nusyuz
W The le,rned kh,di held ,fter he,ring the
p,rties, ordered the hus-d to p,y $500 ,s edd,h
m,inten,nce
4 4
t is thereIore provided in t is thereIore provided in sec 71 oI A sec 71 oI Athat a that a
divorced W divorced W is entitled to stay in the house is entitled to stay in the house
where she used to live when she was married where she used to live when she was married
Ior as long as the H is not able to get other Ior as long as the H is not able to get other
suitable accommodation Ior her. Such right to suitable accommodation Ior her. Such right to
accommodation shall cease: accommodation shall cease:
1. 1.I the period oI I the period oI iddah iddah has expired, or has expired, or
2. 2.I the period oI guardianship oI the children I the period oI guardianship oI the children
has expired, or has expired, or
3. 3.I the woman remarried I the woman remarried
4. 4.I the W has been guilty oI open lewdness I the W has been guilty oI open lewdness
And thereupon H may apply to the court Ior the And thereupon H may apply to the court Ior the
return oI the house to him. return oI the house to him.
5 5
Mutaah Mutaah or consolatory giIt to woman divorced or consolatory giIt to woman divorced
without just cause. without just cause.
n n addition to her right Ior maintenance addition to her right Ior maintenance, a woman , a woman
who has been divorced who has been divorced without just cause without just cause by her by her
husband may apply to the Court Ior husband may apply to the Court Ior mutaah mutaah or a or a
consolatory giIt, the Court may, aIter hearing the consolatory giIt, the Court may, aIter hearing the
parties and upon being satisIied that the woman has parties and upon being satisIied that the woman has
been divorced without just cause, order the been divorced without just cause, order the
husband to pay such sum as may be Iair and just husband to pay such sum as may be Iair and just
according to according to ukum ukum Syara Syara. .
6 6
According to slam the payment oI muta`ah is According to slam the payment oI muta`ah is
advocated as it helps to lessen the burden on advocated as it helps to lessen the burden on
the woman who has begin to the woman who has begin to begin a new liIe begin a new liIe
aIter the divorce. aIter the divorce.
t is also regarded as a recompense and a t is also regarded as a recompense and a
recognition oI the beneIits obtained by the H recognition oI the beneIits obtained by the H
Irom the love and attention given by the W Irom the love and attention given by the W
during the marriage. during the marriage.
7 7
Normally depends on the agreement oI both parties but Normally depends on the agreement oI both parties but
where no agreement can be reached, it is decided by where no agreement can be reached, it is decided by
the Qadhi. the Qadhi.
n Iixing the amount oI muta`ah, the Qadhi will n Iixing the amount oI muta`ah, the Qadhi will
consider consider
the Iinancial position oI the parties whether they are the Iinancial position oI the parties whether they are
rich or poor and rich or poor and
the position and circumstances oI the W the position and circumstances oI the W
The status oI the Iamily in the society The status oI the Iamily in the society
8 8
The payment oI The payment oI mutaah mutaah is incumbent on the is incumbent on the
H who divorces his W H who divorces his W
al al Baqarah Baqarah 2:241 2:241
'.For divorced woman '.For divorced woman mutaah mutaah should be should be
provided on a reasonable scale. This is a duty provided on a reasonable scale. This is a duty
on the righteous.` on the righteous.`
The jurists oI the The jurists oI the ShaIi`i ShaIi`i school held that the school held that the
payment oI payment oI muta`ah muta`ah is a duty in regard to is a duty in regard to
wives who are divorced whether beIore or wives who are divorced whether beIore or
aIter cohabitation. aIter cohabitation.
9 9
Where there is a dispute as to amount oI Where there is a dispute as to amount oI
muta`ah, the Qadi should decide according to muta`ah, the Qadi should decide according to
his discretion and take into consideration what his discretion and take into consideration what
is Iair according to the position oI the parties is Iair according to the position oI the parties
including the Iinancial position oI the H and including the Iinancial position oI the H and
the position and quality oI the W the position and quality oI the W
30 30
Noor Bee v Ahm,d S,nusi 1978 1JH Noor Bee v Ahm,d S,nusi 1978 1JH
1 63 1 63
Sh,rif,h v Z,in,l Al,m 1978 1 JH 1 Sh,rif,h v Z,in,l Al,m 1978 1 JH 1
93 93
Norm,idi,h v Azh,ri 1979 1 JH 91 Norm,idi,h v Azh,ri 1979 1 JH 91
S,-,ri,h v Z,inol 1980 1 JH 99 S,-,ri,h v Z,inol 1980 1 JH 99
Z,wiy,h v Rosl,n 1980 1 JH 10 Z,wiy,h v Rosl,n 1980 1 JH 10
W oor Bee v Ahmad Sanusi (1978) 1JH
(1) 63
W Mut,,h is , gift which is m,nd,ted -y
sy,r,' if the div is not c,used -y the wife
or ,ny defect on her p,rt or f,s,kh -y the
wife -ec,use of her hus-d's f,ult or ,ny
defect on her p,rt. t is not only
compulsory if there is no more love ,nd
-ec,use of th,t, mut,,h is compulsory if
the wife redeem the t,l,q from her
hus-,nd= khuluk
W Sharifah v ZainaI AIam (1978) 1 JH (1)
93
W The div wife cl,im mut,,h $000
W Hus-d did not dispute the right of mut,,h
-ut cl,im it w,s excessive ,s his monthly
s,l,ry w,s only $95
W Le,rned k,di order to p,y $500
W ormaidiah v Azhari (1979) 1 JH (2) 91
W Div wife cl,im mut,,h
W Hus-d cl,imed he m the wife to ,void
disciplin,ry ,ction t,ken vs him ,s he w,s d,ting
her -e4 the m
W Hus-d ,lso cl,im wife did not dischr her duties,
did not cook n w,sh clothes
W Le,rned chief k,di refer to sur,h ,l -,q,r,h , v
41,th,t p,yment of mut,,h is incum-ent on the
hus-d who div his wife
W Sh,fiee school mut,,h is , duty to wife who
,re div whether -e4 or ,fter coh,-it,tion
W S. -,q,r,h, v 36 ,lso st,ted mut,,h sd
-e given, the rich ,ccording to his me,ns
n the poor ,ccording to his me,ns
W The div w,s not due to ,ny serious defect
w not nusyuz nor f,s,kh due to defect of
hus-d
W As to ,mt of mut,,h p,rties ,re middle
cl,ss n crt fix the mut,,h ,t $1000
W Sabariah v ZainoI (1980) 1 JH (2) 99
W Div wife cl,im mut,,h
W Hus-d disputed the cl,im ,s the w did not
c,rry her duties. he h,d to m,ke his own
-ed n cook his me,ls
W The le,rned judge however held since the
div w,s effected -y the hus-d so she is
entitled for mut,,h
W The mut,,h is fix ,t $1000
W Zawiyah v #osIan (1980) 1 JH (2) 102
W W cl,im mut,,h in ,ddition to edd,h m,inten,nce
W The k,di ,sserted mut,,h is , gift p,y,-le -y hus-d
who div his wife
W th,t p,yment of mut,,h is incum-ent on the hus-d who
div his wife n when it is not due to ,ny serious defect on
the p,rt of the wife or f,s,kh -ecu,se hus-d is the one
who pronouce the t,l,q, hus-d effected the div, so
mut,,h -ecome compulsory to -e p,id from hus-d to w
W ,s for the ,mt, since no ,greement on it crt -,se on S.
-,q,r,h, v 36 mut,,h sd -e given, the rich ,ccording
to his me,ns n the poor ,ccording to his me,ns
37 37
eIinition? eIinition?
An An- -Nisa:4 Nisa:4
'.and give the woman on marriage their '.and give the woman on marriage their
dower as a free gift, but if they of their own dower as a free gift, but if they of their own
good pleasure remit any part of it to you, take it good pleasure remit any part of it to you, take it
and enfoy it with right good cheer.` and enfoy it with right good cheer.`
38 38
S.57 S.57
Cl,im for p,yment of m,hr on div is r,re Cl,im for p,yment of m,hr on div is r,re
J,n,t v Sheikh Khud, Bukhs 1911 FMSLR J,n,t v Sheikh Khud, Bukhs 1911 FMSLR
61 61
Rosn,h v -r,him 1979 1 JH 1 94 Rosn,h v -r,him 1979 1 JH 1 94
S,lm, v M,t Akhir 1983 5 JH 161 S,lm, v M,t Akhir 1983 5 JH 161
Siti Z,mr,h v M,jid 1986 6 JH 130 Siti Z,mr,h v M,jid 1986 6 JH 130
!iah v Che ah (1983) 3 JH 220 !iah v Che ah (1983) 3 JH 220
#ohaniah v Hj Ujang (1983) 4 JH 270 #ohaniah v Hj Ujang (1983) 4 JH 270
W Janat v Sheikh Khuda Bukhs (1911) 2
FMSL# 61
W Hus-d must p,y m,sk,win to wife in
money
W Only with wife consent c,n he su-stitute
,rticles for money
W f no proof of consent to receive ,rticle
r,ther th,n money the -urden is on the
hus-d to proof it
W #osnah v Ibrahim (1979) 1 JH (1) 94 -
294 AI
W Div wife cl,im m,sk,win $58 ,nd -,l,nce
of m exp,nses $300
W After he,ring the p,rties, the judge found
th,t m,sk,win h,ve -een p,id -ut ordered
the hus-d to p,y the -,l,nce of m
exp,nses
W SaIma v Mat Akhir (1983) 5 JH 161
W Div w cl,im m,sk,win of $600 which is still
owing
W Hus-d cl,imed wife h,d decline the m,sk,win
W Wife c,ll two witness -ut only one is ,ccepted ,s
the other witness is her f,ther
W After he,ring the p,rties , k,di ,ccepted the
evidence of the div w n ordered hus-d to p,y
m,sk,win $600
W Siti Zamrah v Majid (1986) 6 JH 130
W Div w pf cl,im m,sk,win n pem-eri,n
W Hus-d defend,nt cl,imed th,t pf w h,d ,greed
to h,nd over ,ll the prop to him to f,cilit,te the
div
W Def c,lled his witness
W The crt ,sk wife to t,ke o,th to deny such
,greement
W Crt refer to sec 45 of Kel sl,mic F,mily l,w
En,ctment 1983 n sur,h ,n nis,, verse 4 on the
right of w to m,sk,win
W After pf w h,d t,ken o,th the crt ordered hus-d
to p,y tot,l of $770 to pf
W !iah v Che Lah (1983) 3 JH 220
W Crt o-served th,t HP is jointly ,cquired
prop ,cquired during their life together
reg,rdless whether the contri-ution is in
the s,me form or not, whether form,lly or
inform,lly
W Hus-d c,nnot cl,im under p,rtnership
-ec,use in p,rtnership, c,pit,l ,re sh,red
to ,cquire the prop
W #ohaniah v Hj Ujang (1983) 4 JH 270
W A fed territory c,se
W Div wife cl,im mut,,h plus edd,h m,inten,nce
W W cl,im $10000 -ut hus-d offered $1000
W Le,rned judge refer to Mugn al Muhtaj when
there is dispute on the ,mt of mut,,h , k,di
should decide ,ccording to his discretion n
consider wh,t is f,ir -,se on the position of the
p,rties including fin,nci,l position of hus-d n the
qu,lityworth of the w h,s w s,crificed for the
f,mily
45 45
This right was based in the This right was based in the Malay custom Malay custom and and
in Iact claims Ior a share in the jointly acquired in Iact claims Ior a share in the jointly acquired
property or property or harta sepencarian harta sepencarian, could be made , could be made
in in High Court High Court as well as in as well as in Shariah court Shariah court..
The civil court have held that the right is one The civil court have held that the right is one
that arises under the Malay custom that arises under the Malay custom
46 46
The earliest cases were summarized in The earliest cases were summarized in
#oberts v Umi Kalthum |1966| 1 MJ 16 #oberts v Umi Kalthum |1966| 1 MJ 16
S. of FLA nterpret,tion S. of FLA nterpret,tion- - "h,rt, "h,rt,
sepenc,ri,n me,ns property jointly sepenc,ri,n me,ns property jointly
,cquired -y hus-,nd ,cquired -y hus-,nd
,nd wife during the su-sistence of ,nd wife during the su-sistence of
m,rri,ge in ,ccord,nce with the m,rri,ge in ,ccord,nce with the
conditions stipul,ted -y Hukum Sy,r,k conditions stipul,ted -y Hukum Sy,r,k
S.58 S.58 power of the crt to order division power of the crt to order division
of h,rt, sepenc,ri,n of h,rt, sepenc,ri,n
W C,se R,m,h v L,ton w,s referred in #oberts v
Umi KaIthum [1966] 1 MLJ once it is cle,rly
est,-lish th,t where prop w,s ,cquired
su-sequent to the m out of their joint effort or
joint resources, , presumption ,rise th,t it is ,
HP.
W The presumption is rebuttabIe such ,s -y
evidence th,t prop w,s ,cquired -y hus-d sole
effort or it w,s , gift from the w
W With reg,rds to division of HP throughout the
st,tes in M'si,, div w entitled to HP sh,re
W The sh,re of Per,k wom,n is 13
W For other st,tes the trend is sh,re
Ro-erts v Umi K,lthum [1966] 1 Ro-erts v Umi K,lthum [1966] 1
MLJ 16 MLJ 16
W Pf hus-d contri-ute $40000 while def wife r,ised
$10000 tow,rds the purch,se of , hse in
Set,p,k, KL
W The hse w,s registered in the def n,me
W Upon div the hus-d cl,imed he should h,ve
equ,l sh,re to the hse -ec,use he h,ve never
intended to m,ke the hse , gift to the def
W W dis,greed n hus-d -rought ,ction in hg crt
W The hse w,s registered in def w n,me for the
s,ke of convenience ,s hus-d w,s govt serv,nt
govt serv,nt must decl,re ,ll their prop
W His lordship w,s ,lso s,tisfied th,t def h,ve f,iled to
est,-lished th,t the hse w,s , gift to her- the
presumption th,t the hse w,s , gift is re-utt,-le
W Wife ,rgued th,t the hse w,s registered in her n,me,
her title w,s indefe,si-le -y virtue of sec 4 of NLC
W His lordship refer the c,se of Luj,h Lij,h - J,m,l v
F,tim,h B M,t Di,h, the indefe,si-ility of title w,s not
invoke r,ise ,nd his lordship concluded, it w,s not
invoked -ec,use those provision were not ,pplic,-le to
m,tters pert,ining to HP eventhough there is ,
presumption th,t prop is solely ,cquired -y hus-d or hse
w,s presumed to -e , gift to the wife -ut it is re-utt,-le
W revoc,-ility of title w,s not r,ise -ec,use even
supposing it is registered un w n,me -ut hus-d w,s the
sole p,yer to the hse. Since it come under HP it is not
suit,-le to cl,im indefe,si-ility of title here.
W Even if it is registered in w n,me, hus-d is
entitled for equ,l sh,re -ecu,se ,ny prop
,cquired su-sequent to m ,re deemed ,s
HP
W Crt is s,tisfied prop is not , gift &
eventhough hus-d p,yed for the hse -ut
prop ,cquired su-sequent to m ,re
deemed ,s HP wife c,nnot cl,im sole
ownership neither do hus-d, it is reg,rded
,s sh,red prop
W Fin,lly on the pf's sh,re to the s,id prop his Lordship
w,s incline to ,w,rd equ,l sh,re if -oth p,rties ,greed.
Upon def ,greeing to the h,lf sh,re in the prop , the
le,rned judge ordered ,ccordingly
W S.2 of IFLA define h,rt, sepenc,ri,n ,s jointly
,cquired prop during su-sistence of m n in ,ccord,nce
with hukum sy,r,'
W S.58 (1) of IFLA crt sh,ll hv power when permitting
pronouncement of t,l,q to order division of ,ny ,ssets
,cquired during the m,rri,ge -y their joint effort or s,le
of such ,ssets n division -etween p,rties of the
proceeds of s,le. Crt sh,ll consider
W S.58 (1) of IFLA crt sh,ll hv power when permitting
pronouncement of t,l,q to order division of ,ny ,ssets
,cquired during the m,rri,ge -y their joint effort or s,le
of such ,ssets n division -etween p,rties of the
proceeds of s,le. Crt sh,ll consider
W the extent of contri-ution m,de -y e,ch p,rty or l,-our
tow,rds the ,cquiring of the ,sset
W ,ny de-ts owed -y the p,rty contr,cted for their joint
-enefit
W the needs of minor children
W su-ject to these consider,tion the crt sh,ll incline
tow,rds equ,lity of division s.58 FLA
53 53
1. 1. Boto v JaaIar |1985| 2 MJ 98 Boto v JaaIar |1985| 2 MJ 98
2. 2. Sabariah v Zainol |179| 1 JH (2)99 Sabariah v Zainol |179| 1 JH (2)99
3. 3. Bidah v Abdul Ghani |1982| 4 JH 225 Bidah v Abdul Ghani |1982| 4 JH 225
4. 4. Tengah v brahim|1979| 2 JH 300 Tengah v brahim|1979| 2 JH 300
5. 5. Zarah v dris |1984| 5 JH 186 Zarah v dris |1984| 5 JH 186
6. 6. Ningal Yang Chik v Jamal Abdul #ahman |1988| Ningal Yang Chik v Jamal Abdul #ahman |1988|
6 JH 243; |1989| 2 MJ xxix 6 JH 243; |1989| 2 MJ xxix
W Boto v Jaafar [1985] 2 MLJ 98
W Pf wife worked ,s coffeeshop ,ssist,nt while
the def hus-d work in fishmonger in Dungun
T'g,nu
W The -usiness prospehred n he -ought ,
m,trimoni,l home, , piece of l,nd , 4 fishing
-o,t, fishing net n , fish st,ll
W Su-sequently the p,rties div n def hus-d merely
g,ve def m,inten,nce during her edd,h
W The pf cl,imed h,lf sh,re of ,ll the prop
,cquired during her m to the def
W And ,nother h,lf sh,re on the income derive
from the prop fish st,ll, fishing etc since their
divorce
W Tun S,lleh A-,s held HP is more on ,d,t n
refer sec of T'g,nu Administr,tion of sl,mic
L,w En,ct 1955 which define HP ,s
The e,rnings
Or prop ,cquired ,s the result of joint l,-our of two
spouses
ncludes the income derive from c,pit,l of joint l,-our
W t is due to this joint effort or joint l,-our th,t ,
div spouse is entitled to , sh,re in the prop
W Thus once it is proven th,t the cl,im,nt h,d ,ssisted in
the working of it, the l,w presumed th,t the prop w,s
HP, it is for other spouse who denies the cl,im to re-ut
the presumption
W HP ,pplies to ,ll kinds of prop, mov,-le or immov,-le
W Prop divided into one third for the pf n two third to def
hus-d
W For -o,t, pf w get h,lf sh,re -'cos it is registered in their
joint n,mes
W W ,lso get one third of income derive from -o,t, net n
fish
W Although HP c,se c,n -e -rought in civil n sy,ri,h crt
-ut judges ,re hesit,nt to he,r such c,se ,s the ex,ct
st,tus of HP w,s still uncle,r
W To convert l,-our to monet,ry term difficult how to
determine the extent of l,-our
W Sabariah v ZainoI [179] 1 JH (2)99
W Div wife cl,im mut,,h. Wife h,s not
contri-ute on the hse
W Hus-d disputed the cl,im ,s the w did not
c,rry her duties. he h,d to m,ke his own
-ed n cook his me,ls
W The le,rned judge however held since the
div w,s effected -y the hus-d so she is
entitled for mut,,h
W The mut,,h is fix ,t $1000
W Bidah v AbduI Ghani [1982] 4 JH 225
W The div w cl,im sh,re in jointly ,cquired
prop
W During the tri,l the p,rties re,ch ,n
,greement th,t hse, -uff,los, ru--er
m,tting n money -e divided equ,lly
The hsehold utensil which origin,lly
-elong to the hus-d were returned to him
W Tengah v Ibrahim[1979] 2 JH 300
W The hus-d cl,im sh,re in jointly ,cquired prop
W Hus-d work ,s l,-orer n w receive p,yment
from ,gricultur,l pursuit
W During the m they -uilt hse -elonging to -oth
W Hse w,s occupied -y the w
W After the div hus-d cl,im the hse should -e
divided to 3. 1 p,rt for the w n p,rts -elong to
him
W The wife ,dmitted the hse w,s HP -ut
cl,imed it w,s proper th,t the prop -e
divided equ,lly
W K,di ordered p,rts given to the hus-d n
1 p,rt to the wife ,s the hus-d contri-ute
more th,n the wife
W Wife ,ppe,l -ut ,ppe,l dismissed
W Zarah v Idris [1984] 5 JH 186
W W cl,im , sh,re in jointly ,cquired prop
W Hus-d g,ve evidence th,t the hse w,s -ought
-y him out of his own money
W The dep w,s p,id out from his EPF n monthly
inst,llment deducted from his s,l,ry
W He ,lso g,ve evidence th,t the wife h,d left the
m,trimoni,l home ,t her own ,ccord
W The crt dismissed the wife cl,im
W ingaI @ Yang Chik v JamaI AbduI #ahman
[1988] 6 JH 243; [1989] 2 MLJ xxix
W The div w cl,im , sh,re in jointly ,cquired prop
W t ,ppe,red th,t hus-d h,s div w on 1 dec 8
-ut the div w,s not registered n only regis in j,n
83
W When div w,s regis hus-d ,greed to sell the hse
n divide the proceed of s,le equ,lly with the w
W As the hus-d -re,k the promise the w -rought ,
cl,im for h,lf sh,re in the proceeds of s,le of the
hse
W K,di dismissed the w cl,im ,s -oth the hse n c,r
were -ought -y the hus-d
W W ,ppe,l, the ,ppe,l w,s dismissed
63 63
1. 1. ShariIah Sapoyah v Wan Alwi |1988| 6 JH 259 ShariIah Sapoyah v Wan Alwi |1988| 6 JH 259
2. 2. #okiah v Mohamed dris |1986| 6 JH 272 #okiah v Mohamed dris |1986| 6 JH 272
3. 3. Tengku Anum Zaharah v ato` r Hussein |1980| 3 Tengku Anum Zaharah v ato` r Hussein |1980| 3
JH 125 JH 125
4. 4. Zainuddin v Anita |1982| 4 JH 73 Zainuddin v Anita |1982| 4 JH 73
5. 5. Haji Abdul #ahim v sagaton|1980| 2 JH 264 Haji Abdul #ahim v sagaton|1980| 2 JH 264
6. 6. Mat Noordin v Ainon|1988| 7 JH 95 Mat Noordin v Ainon|1988| 7 JH 95
W Sharifah Sapoyah v Wan AIwi [1988] 6 JH 259
W The w cl,im sh,re on HP on hse n l,nd
W The cl,im w,s dismiss -y the crt
W Crt held the w w,s un,-le to give p,rticul,rs of
the l,nd n its title
W Hus-d denied the existence of the prop
W He relied on annat at-Tal-n in reg,rds to
necessity to ,dduce evidence of loc,tion n ,re,
of l,nd
W The crt ,lso dismissed w cl,im on toyot, c,r -ut
,llowed the w cl,im on TV set, fridge, w,shing
m,chine n ford escort c,r which hus-d ,dmitted
,s HP
W Crt g,ve one third of v,lue of prop to the wife
W #okiah v Mohamed Idris [1986] 6 JH 272
W Wife contri-ution in looking ,fter the household
W n this c,se, the crt h,d dismissed the wife's
cl,im for h,rt, sepenc,ri,n HP on the grd th,t
the prop in Q were ,cquired -y the hus-d with
his own money
W Wife ,ppe,l
W Fed Territory of Sy,ri,h Bo,rd of Appe,l
,llowed the ,ppe,l n held th,t wife's indirect
contri-ution to the ,cquisition of prop ,cquired
during the m,rri,ge exists.
W Looking ,fter the hse hold n f,mily m-
considered ,s HP
W Tengku Anum Zaharah v Dato' Dr Hussein
[1980] 3 JH 125
W The hus-d h,d during the m ,cquired
consider,-le prop eg 5 pieces of l,nd, 5 shops n
wife cl,im for sh,res of the properties
W Sel sy,ri,h crt found on evidence th,t the
properties were ,cquired -y sole effort of hus-d
n ,-ility of hus-d n th,t wife h,ve m,de no
contri-ution either in money or l,-our
W Nevertheless she h,d m,de mor,l contri-ution
to her hus-d success
W The hus-d enjoy r,pid success in -usiness due
to pu-lic confidence in the wife st,tus ,s
mem-ers of the roy,l f,mily
W The crt g,ve her , h,lf sh,re in one of the
pieces of l,nd ,cquired -y the hus-d
W Mor,l contri-ution here w,s -,sed on
p,rticul,r circumst,nces i.e. the wife
st,tus ,s mem-er of roy,lty not on the
wife st,tus looking ,fter the home ,nd
c,ring for welf,re of the f,mily
W Zainuddin v Anita [1982] 4 JH 73
W the div w cl,im idd,h m,inten,nce ,t $500
permth ,mounting to 1500 for 3 mths. But the
hus-d refuse n offered 300 permth. W did not
,ccept this
W held the crt ordered hus-d to p,y 300
,mounting to 900 for 3 mths
W ,lthou hus-d ,ppe,l to the ,ppe,l -o,rd on
other m,tters , he did not ,ppe,l ,g,inst the
order of m,inten,nce
W Haji AbduI #ahim v Isagaton[1980] 2 JH 264 - 314
famiIy Iaw in m'sia by ahmad Ibrahim (AI)
W The w who hv -een div cl,imed h,lf sh,re of the hse in
sel,ngor
W Le,rned chief k,di found w h,ve contri-uted to the
,cquisition of the hse n pc of the l,nd.
W She ,lso contri-ute to the welf,re of the f,mily -y
looking ,fter the hsehold n c,ring for the f,mily
W He ordered hus-d sd register the h,lf of the l,nd in
wife's n,me. hus-d ,ppe,l -ut ,ppe,l dismissed
W Mat oordin v Ainon[1988] 7 JH 95
W t w,s h who cl,im sh,re of HP consisting of
hsehold ,ppli,nce like w,shing m,chine, fridge
n tv set
W The le,rned judge of sy,ri,h crt ordered the
prop to -e equ,lly divided -etween p,rties
W n c,se the ,ppli,nces were not required for use
-y ,ny of the p,rties, crt will ,ssess it -,se on
h,lf sh,re
Ancill,ry relief for NM Ancill,ry relief for NM
, m,inten,nce , m,inten,nce
ntroduction ntroduction
Wh,t is m,inten,nce? Wh,t is m,inten,nce?
Re Borthwick Dece,sed Borthwick v Re Borthwick Dece,sed Borthwick v
Be,uv,is [1949] 1 All ER 47 Be,uv,is [1949] 1 All ER 47
S.51 LRA S.51 LRA- - Dissolution on ground of conversion
to sl,m
T,n Sung Mooi v Too Miew Kim [1994] 3 MLJ T,n Sung Mooi v Too Miew Kim [1994] 3 MLJ
117 117
S.5 LRA S.5 LRA- - Dissolution -y mutu,l consent
71 71
W #e Borthwick (Deceased) Borthwick v
Beauvais [1949] 1 AII E# 472
W Dece,sed hus-d m his w until 195 n
-ecome , -,nkrupt
W Wife then lived with hus-d p,rents
W n the w ,-sence hus-d continue to live in
the m,trimoni,l home n coh,-it with other
wom,n
W Su-sequently his fin,nci,l position gre,tly
improved
W He died le,ving gross est,te of 40000
W n his lifetime he never provide more th,n 3 ,
week to his wife n f,mily
W On his de,th hus-d -eque,th 50 to his wife
W Wife cl,imed 're,son,-le provision' ,lloc,tion
-e m,de under nherit,nce F,mily Provision
Act 1938
W H,rmen J held , m,n in his position ought
re,son,-ly to h,ve provided for his wife from
whom he p,rted through no p,rticul,r f,ult on
her p,rt. The wife is entitled to , generous sc,le
of living
W The 'conduct of depend,nt' in rel,tion to sec
16 of nherit,nce F,mily Provision Act 1938
could not me,n the difference -etween 'proper
provisionm,inten,nce' ,nd 'in,dequ,te
provision' -ut me,nt th,t , depend,nt whose
conduct w,s uns,tisf,ctory should receive less
th,n she would otherwise h,d.
W Since it is cle,r wife s,crifice to keep m
with -eh,vior of hus-d th,t w,s
unre,son,-le, her conduct entitled her to
get more of her hus-d est,te
W Crt ,w,rd her income sd -e 1000 , ye,r
not 50 ,s -eque,th -y her Hus-d
W Tan Sung Mooi v Too Miew Kim [1994] 3 MLJ
117
W Petitioner w n resp hus-d m,rried -ut sep,r,ted
in 198. in 1991 crt gr,nted decree nisi
W Pending the decree m,de ,-solute p file
,pplic,tion to divide ,sset vs resp u s.76 n 77
LRA
W Resp hus-d o-ject ,nd cl,imed hg crt h,s no
jurisdiction to divide the ,sset -ecos he h,s
converted to sl,m
W W cl,im th,t since she is still , non Muslim, she
c,nnot come u the jurisdiction of sy,ri,h crt
W She ,lso s,id s.33 LRA does not ,pply
to Muslim w,s unconsti ,s it prevent her
from getting her sh,re in m,trimoni,l
,ssets
W There is isu here
W 1. Whether s.3 of LRA unconsti
W . Whe crt h,s continuing jurisdiction to
gr,nt ,ncill,ry relief given th,t the hg crt
h,d dissolve the m
W Held s.3 w,s not unconstitution,l -ec,use s.76
n 77 rel,te with leg,l o-lig,tion of non MusIim
spouse so crt h,s jurisdiction to determine
reIief incidentaI to the gr,nting of div.
W Bec,use p,rties ,re still non Muslim when they
m so crt took th,t e,rly st,tus to gr,nt relief.
Conversion h,ppen only ,fter they ,re m
W S.5 LRA- div on mutu,l consent
Siv,nes,n v Shym,l, [1986] 1MLJ
400
W Sec 51 conversion n s.5 div -y consent
W LRA provide for other ground of div
W S. 57 cover contested div not div -y
consent
W n mutu,l div there is no contest/ no fight
- it faIIs under undefended divorce
W So joint petitioner do not h,ve to prove the
-re,kdown of m
Assessment of m,inten,nce Assessment of m,inten,nce
S.77 LRA S.77 LRA - - Power for court to order
m,inten,nce of spouse
S.78 LRA S.78 LRA - - Assessment of m,inten,nce
Ko,y Cheng Eng v Lind, Her,w,ti Ko,y Cheng Eng v Lind, Her,w,ti
S,ntoso [004] 6 MLJ 395 S,ntoso [004] 6 MLJ 395
Ch,w Anui v T,n Kim Ch,i [004] 4 MLJ Ch,w Anui v T,n Kim Ch,i [004] 4 MLJ
7 7
Lee Yu L,n v Lim Th,in Chye [1984] 1 Lee Yu L,n v Lim Th,in Chye [1984] 1
MLJ 56 MLJ 56
80 80
W Koay Cheng Eng v Linda Herawati Santoso
[2004] 6 MLJ 395
W The petitioner hus-d, , m'si,n n resp w ,n indo
were m in UK in 1980
W After 6 yrs of m hus-d petitioned for div
W n ,ssessing the ,mount of m,inten,nce, the crt
will t,ke into ,ccount the ,mt of m,inten,nce
hus-d sd p,y the wife depending on the me,ns
n needs ,s well ,s st,nd,rd of living of the
p,rties
W The crt ,lso consider whether hus-d h,d
fin,nci,lly support the wife during the m
W Also the p,rties e,rning c,p,city
W f the p,rty -elong to , respect,-le f,mily,
the order of m,inten,nce would -e higher
W Chaw Anui v Tan Kim Chai [2004] 4 MLJ 272
W Applic,nt wife ,pply for equ,l division of ,ll prop
registered u sever,l comp,nies n sh,res
,cquired during m n ,ll monies held in -,nk
during the m ,s ,ncill,ry relief
W Resp h cl,im the -ung,low were gift n thus
excluded from division
W The prop held u LP M Sdn Bhd n S,thy,m
Holding ,lso to -e excluded from division ,s
they h,ve -een tr,nsferred to his -rother n
d,ughter
W Held the -ung were not gift n even if it were ,
gift, they would not -e excludedexempted from
distri-ution of m,trimoni,l ,sset ,s 'coming to
possession' is , form of ,cquiring ,sset within
the me,ning of s.76 LRA jointly ,cquired prop
W All prop held -y LP n S,thy,m Holding n ,ll
sh,res which the hus-d previously held -ut h,d
disposed off to -rother n d,ughter, sd -e su-ject
to distri-ution
W Lee Yu Lan v Lim Thain Chye [1984] 1 MLJ 56
W W cl,im she h,s contri-uted to m,trimoni,l
home -y c,ring ,nd looking ,fter the children
W Hse w,s -ought -y h n he sold it for $191,000 n
purch,ser p,id $41000 ,s dep
W Crt consider the de-ts of h n possi-ility of the
-,nk pressing for p,yment hus-d still h,s to
p,y the housing lo,n
W So the crt ordered th,t wife -e given 13 of the
sh,re she is entitled for $60000 out of full pc
price $191000
EXPRATON OF EXPRATON OF
MANTENANCE ORDER MANTENANCE ORDER
S.81 S.81- - Dur,tion of orders for m,inten,nce
S.8 S.8 - - Right to m,inten,nce to ce,se on
rem,rri,ge
86 86
VARATON OF MANTENANCE VARATON OF MANTENANCE
ORDER ORDER
S.83 S.83 - - Power for court to v,ry orders for
m,inten,nce
Ann, T,y Siew Hong v Joseph Ng Tiong Ann, T,y Siew Hong v Joseph Ng Tiong
Yong [1995] 3 CLJ 717 Yong [1995] 3 CLJ 717
Lim Bee Kee v Leong Ah Chu,n [1998] 1 Lim Bee Kee v Leong Ah Chu,n [1998] 1
MLJ 675 MLJ 675
87 87
W Anna Tay Siew Hong v Joseph g Tiong
Yong [1995] 3 CLJ 717
W Resp h filed ,pplic,tion to rescind m,inten,nce
order ,s he cl,imed he w,s 60 n suffered from
sever,l ,ilments, h,d no perm,nent work n w,s
dependent on his second w
W The crt w,s s,tisfied th,t there w,s m,teri,l
ch,nge -etween resp n petitioner n ,llowed the
hus-d ,pplic,tion
W Lim Bee Kee v Leong Ah Chuan [1998]
1 MLJ 675
W The c,se w,s the opposite from the ,-ove
W Crt dismissed the hus-d ,pplic,tion to
reduce m,inten,nce from $600 to $300
every mth to wife n children ,s there w,s
no m,teri,l ch,nge in circumst,nces
B DVSON OF PROPERTY B DVSON OF PROPERTY
S.76 LRA S.76 LRA- - Power for court to order
division of m,trimoni,l ,ssets
S. 76. 1 The court sh,ll h,ve power, when
gr,nting , decree of divorce or judici,l
sep,r,tion, to order the division -etween the
p,rties of ,ny ,ssets ,cquired -y them during the
m,rri,ge -y their joint efforts or the s,le of ,ny
such ,ssets ,nd the division -etween
the p,rties of the proceeds of s,le.
90 90
W W Ong Ah M,i v Ling Pooi Ming [1984] Ong Ah M,i v Ling Pooi Ming [1984]
MLJ 19 MLJ 19
W W Ching Seng Wo,h v Lim Shook Lin [1997] Ching Seng Wo,h v Lim Shook Lin [1997]
1 MLJ 15 1 MLJ 15
W W Wong Kim Fong v Te,u Ah K,u [1998] 1 Wong Kim Fong v Te,u Ah K,u [1998] 1
MLJ 359 MLJ 359
W ng Ah Mai v Ling !ooi Ming [1984] 2
MLJ 129
W Crt h,s no jurisdiction to m,ke orders
pert,ining to division of f,mily prop for the
p,rties, if it is not m,de during the div
petition or judici,l sep,r,tion
W Order of m,inten,nce c,n -e gr,nted ,fter
div h,s -een o-t,ined
W Ching Seng Woah v Lim Shook Lin
[1997] 1 MLJ 125
W Asset put in -y spouses for -enefit of
f,mily whether ,cquired solely -y one
p,rty or joint effort ,re m,trimoni,l ,ssets
W Assets cd -e c,pit,l ,sset
W E,rning power is ,lso ,n ,sset
W Wong Kim Fong v Te,u Ah K,u [1998] 1
MLJ 359
W Sh,res ,re constituted ,s m,trimoni,l
,sset n their division depends on the
extent of contri-ution m,de -y e,ch p,rty
W Bec,use s.764 st,tes th,t "the p,rty -y
whose effort the ,sset were ,cquired sh,ll
receive gre,ter proportion
S. 764 S. 764
Lee Yu L,n v Lim Thi,n Chye [1984] 1 Lee Yu L,n v Lim Thi,n Chye [1984] 1
MLJ 56 MLJ 56
Ko,y Cheng Eng v Lind, Her,w,ti Ko,y Cheng Eng v Lind, Her,w,ti
S,ntoso [004] 4 MLJ 395 S,ntoso [004] 4 MLJ 395
Ch,w Anui v T,n Kim Ch,i [004] 4 MLJ Ch,w Anui v T,n Kim Ch,i [004] 4 MLJ
7 7
95 95
W Lee Yu Lan v Lim Thian Chye [1984] 1 MLJ 56
W W cl,im she h,s contri-uted to m,trimoni,l
home -y c,ring ,nd looking ,fter he children
W Hse w,s -ought -y h n he sold it for $191000 n
purch,ser p,id $41000 ,s dep
W Crt consider the de-ts of h n possi-ility of the
-,nk pressing for p,yment
W So the crt ordered th,t wife -e given 13 of the
sh,re she is entitled for $60000 out of full pc
price $191000
Koay Cheng Eng v Linda Herawati Santoso
[2004] 4 MLJ 395
W The crt consider the wife contri-ution tow,rds
hsehold ie p\c of furniture, kitchen ,ppli,nce,
groceries etc ,s contri-ution tow,rds ,cquiring
th,t prop n held w is entitled of one h,lf of ,sset
in eng n m'si,
W EPF w,s ,lso m,trimoni,l ,sset -ec,use w m
with intention of growing old with the hus-d on
his retirement they wd -oth enjoy the -enefit of
money set ,side in EPF
W t4 when m -re,kdown hus-d sd not -e ,llowed
to solely -enefit from the EPF
W Chaw Anui v Tan Kim Chai [2004] 4 MLJ 272 -
W Held the -ung,low were not gift n even if it
were , gift, they would not -e
excludedexempted from distri-ution of
m,trimoni,l ,sset ,s 'coming to possession' is ,
form of ,cquiring ,sset within the me,ning of
s.76 LRA
W All prop held -y LP n S,thy,m Holding n ,ll
sh,res which the hus-d previously held -ut h,d
disposed off to -rother n d,ughter, sd -e su-ject
to distri-ution
W The end