Anita Carolyn Francis v VEERAMOHAN A/L DORAIRAJA
7 cases cited
(0 SG, 7 foreign)
Catchwords
[1] Enclosure 147 is an application by the Respondent Husband (RH) to vary the Consent Order dated 21.6.2019 (Encl 55) and 26.2.2021 (Encl 65). [2] The terms sought to be varied are inter alia as follows: (1) that joint guardianship and joint custody of the Child be granted to both the Petitioner Wife (PW) and RH with are and control granted to the PW; (2) the RH be granted unsupervised access of the Child as follows: (i) unsupervised access (without overnight stays) on Saturday, in the 2nd and 4th week from 10 am – 5 pm; (ii) overnight access every 1st and 3rd week from Friday 6 pm to Sunday 5pm; (RH to send and fetch the Child from the PW’s home according to the times above); (3) for every access of the RH of the Child, the PW nor her family will not obstruct access; (4) RH be entitled to substitute access if access is cancelled; (5) RH be entitled to participate in all school activities of the Child; (6) Additional access during school holidays be granted and divided equally between the RH and the PW; (7) Access on public holidays (8) Additional access be given to the RH on the Child’s birthday, the RH’s birthday, Ponggal, Deepavali, New Year or any religious or family functions at the RH’s home; (9) PW and RH are not allowed to take the Child overseas without the other party’s consent; (10) Video/telephone calls every day for 15 minutes and the PW be directed not to be next to the Child during these calls; (11) The RH and the Child continue the therapy sessions at Selayang Hospital until further advice from the Specialist in Selayang Hospital and/or any other hospital referred to by the specialist; (12) RH to fetch and send Child for each therapy session; (13) PW not be allowed to obstruct, cancel or change the sessions until further advice be obtained from the specialist and the PW not be allowed to accompany the Child; (14) The parents or any party connected with the PW not be allowed to disrupt, obstruct or interfere with every access of the therapy session of the RH and the Child; (15) RH to be informed as soon as possible if the Child is unwell or has an emergency; (16) PW to immediately disclose her latest address to the RH and to inform the RH of the latest address if she changes her address until the Child reaches 18 years of age or completes her tertiary education (Which ever comes first); (17) Penal Indorsement to be entered into the Encl 65 Order; (18) Costs be in the cause; and (19) Any other relief that this Honorable Court deems fit and proper to grant. [3] After hearing both parties, I dismissed the prayers for variation of custody and access and ordered that parties are to bear their own costs.
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
Statutes Cited
Law Reform Act
s 96
Cases Cited (7)
UK (2)
[1971] 3 All ER 682 [1973] 2 All ER 81
MY (5)
[1971] MLJ 280 [2006] 5 CLJ 318 [2008] 3 MLJ 42 [2010] 10 CLJ 371 [2010] 8 CLJ 473
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ba-33-280-04-2018)