案情:

  1. 太太拥有两间她单独一个人名字的屋子。
  2. 在申请离婚的诉讼里,丈夫申请那两间屋子的一半拥有权归他,转移给他。理由是因为他在金钱和精神上有做出付出。
  3. 丈夫声称屋子虽然是太太的名下,其实太太是他的委托人,暂代他持着他那一半的拥有权。
  4. 太太争辩这两间屋子是她一个人的名字,所以丈夫必须提出证据,证明他在这两间屋子做出的贡献/付出。

 

法庭判决:

  1. 证据证明丈夫并没有兴趣购买这两间屋子,也没有付过任何屋子的贷款。
  2. 丈夫没有提出有利的证据证明他对家庭的付出。就算有付出,那些开销也只是一名父亲应该付出的开销。这些开销并不足于证明他对屋子的付出,不足于让丈夫有权利分得屋子的拥有权。
  3. 就算丈夫能证明他在日常用品开销(但是丈夫没有拿出有力证据证明)里做出贡献,这个开销本身不足于不足于让丈夫有权利,分得屋子的拥有权。
  4. 丈夫没有成功证明他对屋子的付出/贡献,法庭否决丈夫能分得太太那两间屋子的一半拥有权。

 

Facts:

  1. Wife (PW) has 2 properties registered under her sole name.
  2. In the divorce proceedings, the Husband (RH) claimed for half share of the 2 properties to be transferred to him. By referring to Section 76(1) – (2) of the Act for direct monetary contribution and under s 76(3) for contribution in kind.
  3. RH claimed that the 2 properties were purchased by PW but she was holding the 2 properties on trust for him.
  4. PW submitted that since the 2 properties were registered under her name, the duty is on RH to prove that it was acquired by their joint efforts.
  5. RW submitted that (1) the claim by RH for his contribution in kind towards the family were not supported by any plausible evidential materials (2) the expenses he did spent for his family are what is to be expected from a father when he agreed that the household consumption and the miscellaneous expenses he spent for his family have been paid as duty of a husband and a father to which he agreed (3) And these expenses cannot be construed as contribution towards the purchase of the Botanic house which entitle RH to a claim towards the Botanic house (4) the properties are still subject to bank loan. RH has not suggested that he is to share the liability in servicing the said loans and leave it to PW to bear the financial liability in servicing both loans. Therefore, it is only just and fair in the circumstances that both properties remain in her name solely.

 

Court held:

  1. RH was never interested to purchase any property or to commit himself to any loan in purchasing the said properties.
  2. RH’s alleged contribution in kind towards the family were not supported by any plausible evidence and the expenses that he did spend were what was expected from a father, these expenses could not be construed as contribution towards the purchase of the Botanic house which entitle RH to a claim towards the Botanic house.
  3. Even if RH had spent on household expenses (which in the circumstances of the case to be highly unlikely), that fact alone is not sufficient for RH to invoke the provision of s 76(2) of the Act to show his contributions to the purchase of the said properties.
  4. Guided by the pronouncements of the Court of Appeal in Yap Yen Piow and anchored on s 76(2) and (3) of the Act, RH had failed to prove his contributions for the purchase of the said properties and therefore his claim for half share of those said properties are dismissed.

 

案件里的其他判决:

Source: Ong Suan Sim v Paul Wilfred Yap @ Yap Ah Tee [2019] 10 MLJ 640, Shah Alam High Court

 

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

*如果需要法律咨询或者聘请律师处理法律事务,你可以联系我们。

*浏览我们律师楼的法律文章: www.kuekong.com

*浏览我们律师楼的法律文章: www.kuekongklg.com

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

*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

*加入我们的网络论坛: www.queco.org

*Wilson Kuek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。我们为无数的平民百姓免费解除了各类的法律困扰。

*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Klang Lawyer. 巴生(吧生)律师楼。

*我们的律师楼拥有超过15年的执业经验。我们处理民事纠纷,商业纠纷,打官司/法庭诉讼,追讨债务,遗产分配,遗嘱,离婚,抚养权,赡养费,产业分配,领养小孩,拟商业合约,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,我们皆都处理。

*We have more than 15 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as commercial disputes, civil litigation, debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.

#马来西亚华人律师 #巴生律师 #吧生律师 #Klang Lawyer #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #KL Lawyer #懂华文的律师

#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼

离婚案: 太太个人名下的房产, 丈夫能分一份吗? Part 1