离婚后: 修改抚养费 [2021] MLJU 446

1. 男女方在2016年办理离婚手续。根据庭令，男方需每个月支付女方如下的抚养费：
   • Perbelanjaan harian sebanyak RM1,500.00 sebulan untuk DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan RM3,500.00 sebulan untuk SARAH TEE YONG WEI dibiayai oleh Pempetisyen Suami.
2. 男方在2021年通过法庭申请减少每个月的抚养费。他的诉求如下：
   • Perbelanjaan—harian nafkah bulanan sebanyak RM1,500.00 RM500.00 sebulan untuk DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan RM3,500.00 RM1500.00 sebulan untuk SARAH TEE YONG WEI dibiayai oleh Pempetisyen Suami;
3. 男方的理由是：
   • 他如近已有了新的家庭，需要抚养现任的妻子和孩子
   • 另外他也为新家庭买了新房和汽车
   • 由于新冠肺炎的关系，影响了公司的财务；这些都导致他的财务状况出现了巨大的改变。
4. 根据1976年婚姻与离婚改革法令96条文，在特殊情况下，法庭有权利在任何时候撤销或者更改当初的庭令。这些情况包括法庭相信当初的庭令是在被误导或错误的情况下作出的，或者现在的情况有了很大的改变。而法庭首要顾虑的是孩子的整体福利。The primary consideration for court shall always be the overall welfare of the said child/children.
5. 男方是在30.8.2016成功办理离婚手续，随后在19.9.2016开始第二次的婚姻，孩子在结婚的两个月后出生出。这表示男方是在离婚后不久便立即开始第二段婚姻。法庭因此表示男方并无法证明发生重大变化的情况，以至于法庭需要修改庭令来减少他的赡养费。
6. 法庭驳回了男方要求减少抚养费的申请。

*详细的案情和判决，请阅读以下的英文版文章。

The Application

1. The matter before the Court is a Notice of Application by the Petitioner Husband to vary a Decree Nisi dated 5.2016; which was made absolute on 30.8.2016.

The Matrix

2. The Petitioners’ are both domiciled in Malaysia and had their marriage registered at Skudai, Johor on 13.12.1998. There are two children to the marriage aged 21 and 14, a boy and a girl respectively, at the time that this application was filed.
3. The mutually agreed terms of the Decree Nisi dated 30.5.2016, inter alia are as follows:

“ 1. Perkahwinan Pempetisyen-pempetisyen tersebut dibubarkan;

1. 2. Hak penjagaan, pemeliharaan dan kawalan ke atas DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan SARAH TEE YONG WEI diberikan kepada Pempetisyen Isteri dan Pempetisyen Suami diberikan akses yang munasabah terhadap anak[1]anak tersebut;
   3. Perbelanjaan harian sebanyak RM1,500.00 sebulan untuk DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan RM3,500.00 sebulan untuk SARAH TEE YONG WEI dibiayai oleh Pempetisyen Suami.
   4. Segala perbelanjaan persekolahan anak-anak tersebut ditanggung oleh Pempetisyen Suami sehingga anak-anak tersebut melanjutkan pelajaran ke peringkatpengajian tinggi/universiti ijazah;
   5. Pempetisyen Isteri dan Pempetisyen Suami bersetuju pembahagian aset dan harta sepencarian dibahagi seperti berikut:

5.1 Pempetisyen Suami memindahmilik semua setengah (1/2) bahagian miliknya atas hartanah yang dikenali sebagai HS(D) 351831 PTD 91234 Mukim Pulai, Daerah Johor Bahru, Negeri Johor (selepas ini disebut sebagai “hartanah tersebut”) kepada Pempetisyen Isteri. Pempetisyen Suami juga bersetuju untuk menanggung segala kos bagi urusan pindahmilik hartanah tersebut.

5.2 Pempetisyen Suami membayar ansuran bulanan pinjaman kepada AmBank Berhad bagi hartanah tersebut sehingga penyelesaian penuh.

5.3 Pempetisyen Suami bersetuju bahawa hasil daripada sewa hartanah tersebut (jika ada) diberikan kepada Pempetisyen Isteri dan anak-anak tersebut sebagai wang nafkah.

1. 6. Perbelanjaan perubatan bagi Pempetisyen Isteri dan anak-anak ditanggung oleh Pempetisyen Suami sepenuhnya.”

4. By way of this application (Enclosure 10), the Petitioner Husband proposes to vary the said Decree Nisi as follows:

“    1. Perkahwinan Pempetisyen-pempetisyen tersebut dibubarkan;

1. 2. Hak penjagaan, pemeliharaan dan kawalan ke atas DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan SARAH TEE YONG WEI diberikan kepada Pempetisyen Isteri dan Pempetisyen Suami diberikan akses yang munasabah terhadap anak[1]anak tersebut;
   3. Perbelanjaan—harian nafkah bulanan sebanyak RM1,500.00 RM500.00 sebulan untuk DESMOND TEE KAI WEN dan RM3,500.00 RM1500.00 sebulan untuk SARAH TEE YONG WEI dibiayai oleh Pempetisyen Suami;
   4. Segala perbelanjaan persekolahan anak anak tesebut ditanggung oleh Pempetisyen Suami sehingga anak-anak tersebut melanjutkan pelajaran ke peringkat pengajian tinggi/universiti ijazah;

Segala perbelanjaan persekolahan anak-anak tersebut sehingga ke peringkat pengajian tinggi/universiti ijazah dibiayai melalui hasil jualan hartanah hartanah yang dikenali sebagai HS(D) 351831 PTD 91234 Mukim Pulai, Daerah Johor Bahru, Negeri Johor yang akan dipegang amanah oleh Pempetisyen Isteri di dalam satu akaun amanah bank;

1. 5. Pempetisyen Isteri dan Pempetisyen Suami bersetuju pembahagian aset dan harta sepencarian dibahagi seperti berikut;

5.1 Pempetisyen Suami memindahmilik semua setengah (1/2) bahagian miliknya atas hartanah yang dikenali sebagai HS(D) 351831 PTD 91234, Mukim Pulai, Daerah Johor Bahru, Negeri Johor (selepas ini disebut sebagai hartanah tersebut) kepada Pempetisyen Isteri. Pempetisyen Suami juga bersetuju untuk menanggung segala kos bagi urusan pindahmilik hartanah tersebut;

5.2 Pempetisyen Suami membayar ansuran bulanan pinjaman kepada AmBank Berhad bagi hartanah tersebut sehingga penyelesaian penuh;

5.3 Pempetisyen Suami bersetuju bahawa hasil daripada sewa hartanah tersebut (jika ada) diberikan kepada Pempetisyen Isteri dan anak-anak tersebut wang nafkah;

5.4 Pempetisyen Suami bersetuju bahawa hasil daripada jualan hartanah tersebut sebanyak RM627,000.00 dipegang amanah oleh Pempetisyen Isteri dalam satu akaun amanah dan digunakan untuk membiayai perbelanjaan perbelanjaan anak-anak sehingga anak- anak menamatkan ijazah sarjanah muda dan perbelanjaan perubatan anak-anak.

1. 6. Perbelanjaan perubatan bagi Pempetisyen Isteri dan anak-anak ditanggung oleh Pempetisyen Suami sepenuhnya; dan”

The Applicant/Petitioner Husband’s Justification for this Application

5. Due to alleged material change of his circumstances the Petitioner Husband avers that this application for variation of the said Decree Nisi is imperative. Among other things, his main platforms for this proposed change are as follows:

i) His financial position has regressed due to the fact that he has a new family, in a wife and child, to support since his divorce from the Petitioner Wife herein. He has bought a new house and car for the new family; thereby incurring extra monthly expenses to defray the respective loans for the house and car. The purchase price of the new house was RM725,000.00; while that of the car was RM105,820.00;

ii) The financial position of the company whereas the Petitioner Husband is a director has been adversely affected due to Covid-19 pandemic, thereby effecting his monthly drawings;

iii) The eldest child, a son aged 21, is currently undergoing National Service in Singapore;

iv) That the Petitioner Wife has breached the terms of the original Decree Nisi by having sold the matrimonial property that had been transferred to her thereunder;

v) That the Petitioner Wife had then went on to purchase another property in Johor Bahru with the intention of moving there from Singapore with the children.

The Petitioner Wife’s Opposition with regard to the Application

6. For ease of reference I will juxtapose the Petitioner Wife’s responses to the main platforms of the Petitioner Husband as set out in [paragraph 5] above:

i) The financial position of the Petitioner Husband has regressed due to the fact that he has a new family:

It was pointed out by the Petitioner Wife that the Petitioner Husband had started this new family hardly before the ink had dried upon their Decree Absolute dated 30.8.2016. In point of fact, this second marriage was conducted on 19.9.2016; which was rapidly followed by the birth of a child of that marriage on 21.11.2016. Given this fact of the close proximity of the events just related, and the point that he was already in a close and intimate relationship with a another during the subsistence of their former marriage, the Petitioner Husband must be taken to have known his financial and moral commitments with regard to his responsibilities to both his former family and his latter one, when he agreed so readily to the terms of the original Decree Nisi dated 30.5.2016. To come now, with this excuse for a justification, is thus both morally and by rights, entirely reprehensible in every sense of that word.

ii) The financial position of the company whereat the Petitioner Husband is a director has been adversely affected due to Covid-19 pandemic, thereby effecting his monthly drawings:

Notwithstanding that the Petitioner Wife does not dispute that the Petitioner Husband’s company may well be affected by the Covid-19 situation; she asserts that both her children and she, herself, are adversely affected as well,  what with the extra expenses that she says the current circumstances entail.

She also pointed out that it was the Petitioner Husband who had himself, as a director of his company, executed a Memorandum dated 2.5.2020 which reduced the salaries of all the workers and staff of his company for the month of April 2020. He had included a ‘Confirmation’ dated 4.5.2020 signed by the Petitioner Husband regarding his agreement for the reduction of his salary for the month of April 2020; and his salary slip for the said month of April 2020, setting out the amount of the deduction of his salary. It is to be noted that although the Petitioner Husband claimed that this deduction would be ongoing in his Affidavit affirmed on 13.7.2020; no further verifying evidence in the form of his salary slips for the months of May and June 2020 were exhibited; nor was there any other confirming evidence of the actual continuance of his monthly salary deductions.

The Petitioner Wife prayed that this Court take heed not to be overly sympathetic to the Petitioner Husband’s claimed financial distress; as he was personally instrumental in making those decisions; and had for all intents and purposes done so voluntarily and with purpose aforethought.

iii) The eldest child, a son aged 21, is currently undergoing National Service in Singapore:

According to the Petitioner Wife, although the eldest child is attending National Service in Singapore at the moment, he has every intention to continue his higher studies on completion of that service. By the terms of the original Decree Nisi, the Petitioner Husband is obligated to remain responsible for that expense until the completion of that child’s higher education. Any attempt to vary that term would thus be unconscionable, pleads the Petitioner Wife.

iv) That the Petitioner Wife has breached the terms of the original Decree Nisi by having sold the matrimonial property that had been transferred to her:

It was pointed out by the Petitioner Wife that the matrimonial property concerned was transferred over to her absolutely; with no strings attached, as per the terms of the Decree Nisi dated 30.5.2016. Admittedly, there was a sub-clause that provided that any rental collected on the said property be utilized as maintenance for the Petitioner Wife and the children; but as the property was never rented out, no such rent was collected. As such, the Petitioner Wife asserted that she had not breached the original Decree Nisi in any form or manner when she elected to sell off the property. That neatly dovetails into the next point ~

v) That the Petitioner Wife had then purchased another property in Johor Bahru with the intention of moving there from Singapore with the children:

The point that the Petitioner Wife stressed here was that, as she had not breached the terms of original Decree Nisi by selling the matrimonial property in the first place, how could the purchase of a new property possibly change the material circumstances affecting the Petitioner Husband?

If anything, it secured the future abode of her children and herself when they eventually repatriate to Johor Bahru from Singapore. It would be an untenable stretch of the imagination to suggest that this would adversely affect the Petitioner Husband in any way.

The Law

7. Section 96 Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976 reads: “The court may at any time andfrom time to time vary, or may rescind, any order for the custody or maintenance of a child on the application of any interested person, where it is satisfied that the order was based on any misrepresentation or mistake of fact or where there has been any material change in the circumstances. “
8. Section 97 Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976 provides: “The court may at any time and from time to time vary the terms of any agreement relating to the custody or maintenance of a child, whether made before or after the appointed date, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in any such agreement, where it is satisfied that it is reasonable and for the welfare of the child so to do. “
9. In DHARSHINI GANESON v. DORAISINGAM THAMBYRAJAH 2020 MLRAU 150 it was held: “[10] Hence, though the general rule is that a consent order cannot be varied unless it is with the agreement of parties affected by it (see: Zainuddin Muhammad v. Atsco & Anor [2003] 1 MLJ 369, CA) in matrimonial matters a consent order maybe altered or varied by the court in exceptional circumstances warranting the court’s intervention.”
10. In JANE DRIPIN v. CHARAN JIT SINGH SANTOKH SINGH [2019] MLRHU 1698 it was held:

“[14] Section 96 of the Act necessitates an occurrence of a material change in the circumstances before the court can order a variation or rescission of the custody orders. It is immaterial if previous applications have been made to vary the original court order and had been dismissed if the court was not satisfied of the alleged material change in circumstances. It does not mean that, with passage of time, the applicant is precluded from making a fresh application to vary the court order as it stands under this section. The primary consideration for court shall always be the overall welfare of the said child/children. The general rule is that a consent order even in a divorce matter must rarely be disturbed unless there are exceptional circumstances…, it was determined by the court that even the refusal of the child to live with the petitioner who was granted custody of the said child was insufficient to constitute a material change in circumstances.

[19] Material Change in Circumstances:

(a) The legal definition of material change in circumstances is not cast in stone. It is ultimately dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each case. No one case is similar to the other. Generally material change in circumstances is something that alters the conditions of the child’s life significantly enough that it may change the court’s decision as to what is in the child’s best interest.

Change in Circumstances: A modification of the physical, emotional, or financial condition of one or both parents used to show the need to modify a custody or support order especially an involuntary occurrence that had it been known at the time of the divorce decree, would have resulted in the court’s issuing a different decree.

(b) The essential elements of a “material change of circumstances” involve a significant alteration of the situation surrounding the child within the custodial scheme ordered by the court which changes occurring had caused an adverse condition for the welfare of the child and should not be continued. The change in circumstances jeopardies the health, safety and welfare of the child warranting a new custody order from the court.“

The Decision

11. Based upon the arguments raised by both parties and upon the law on the issue, I find that the Petitioner Husband has failed to raise convincing or cogent evidence of a material change of circumstances on his part or indeed, on the part of the Petitioner Wife; nor has he advanced any exceptional circumstances to warrant the intervention of this Court to alter or vary the consent Decree Nisi of 30.5.2016.

The Final Order

12. It is thus ordered by this Court that Enclosure 10 be duly dismissed; with costs in the sum of RM5,000.00 (subject to allocator fee) awarded against the Petitioner Husband.

Source: Koh Suee Yan v Tee Chin Kok [2021] MLJU 446. High Court Johor Bahru. Fredrick Indran XA Nicholas JC.

==============================

*如果您需要聘请律师处理法律事务，您可以联系我们。

*如果您需要法律咨询(付费)，您可以联系我们。

*我们的律师楼拥有超过18年的执业经验。我们有处理民事纠纷(打官司/法庭诉讼)、商业纠纷、劳工纠纷(工业法庭）、追讨债务、遗产分配、立遗嘱、离婚、抚养权、赡养费、产业分配、领养小孩、拟商业合约、拟雇佣协议、拟买卖合约、银行贷款、法律咨询、法律顾问、等法律事务。全马的案件，我们皆有处理。*We have more than 18 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as civil litigation, commercial disputes, labour disputes (Industrial Court), debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting employment contract, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.

*Wilson Kuek律师是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们的平台每天为无数的平民百姓免费解除各类的法律困扰。

*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice

*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage

*加入我们的Telegram:

(i) 各项法律/政府政策: https://t.me/LawAndJusticeGroup

(ii) 雇主必知的法律/政府政策: https://t.me/LawAndJusticeEmployer

*订阅我们的YouTube: http://bit.ly/lawnjustice

*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #Klang Legal Firm #Klang Lawyer #KL Lawyer #Kuala Lumpur Lawyer #Chinese Lawyer in Malaysia #Malaysia Lawyer #Litigation Lawyer #Divorce Lawyer #reputable lawyer #trustworthy lawyer

#郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼 #巴生律师楼 #吧生律师楼 #马来西亚华人律师 #懂华文的律师 #懂华语的律师 #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #民事诉讼律师 #民事案律师 #专打官司的律师 #专打官司律师 #工业法庭律师 #劳工法庭律师 #专打离婚案的律师 #专打离婚案律师 #处理离婚的律师 #处理离婚案的律师 #离婚律师 #买卖合约律师 #有经验的律师 #好律师 #专业的律师 #信得过的律师 #利害的律师 #有信誉的律师 #有声望的律师 #出名的律师 #有名的律师 #有实力的律师

#孩子超过21岁 #小孩超过21岁 #能一直修改庭令 #能一直申请修改庭令 #更换抚养权 #修改抚养权 #收入受影响 #收入减少 #收入减低 #疫情影响收入

#vary consent order #amend consent order # exceptional circumstances #material change in the circumstances # Change in Circumstances # involuntary occurrence  #consent order must rarely be disturbed