Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DI ANTARA
DAN
JUDGMENT
(Enclosures 59 and 68)
1
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
The Petitioner husband (PH) is applying via Enclosure 68 to set aside the
decree nisi. Reproduced are the prayers for Enclosure 68 -
2
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
(e) Lain-lain perintah serta relif yang difikirkan wajar dan sesuai
oleh Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini.
(a) Both parties had negotiated for a settlement which was then
recorded. Both were represented by their counsels during the
negotiation. From the Court’s record, it was at 6 pm that parties
recorded a consent judgment as in Enclosure 57. Both
counsels confirmed that their clients had agreed and had
signed Enclosure 51. I then asked both parties and both said
they agreed to the terms after which I recorded the consent
judgment at Enclosure 57. So, all appeared to be regular at the
proceeding to record consent judgment.
(b) Secondly, although counsel for the respondent wife cited the
case of Chew Hon Keong v. Betterproducts Industries Sdn
Bhd & Ors [2013] 7 MLJ 196 it is a High Court decision. It is
therefore not binding on this Court because this Court is bound
by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Visia Finance Bhd v.
3
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
Expert Credit and Leasing Sdn Bhd and Ors [1998] 2 CLJ
845 where His Lordship Mahadev Shanker JCA said -
This Court had also considered the case cited by counsel for
the respondent wife in asking that the decree nisi be amended. I had read
and considered the case ie, Gee Siew Yee v. Ann Wam Tiang [2008] 1
MLJ 754. It is true that it is a Court of Appeal decision but that is a case
about interlocutory application. It was held (dismissing the appeal) as
follows -
4
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
5
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
6
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
7
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
In the same case, Arifin Zakaria FCJ (as he then was) said -
8
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
The Court of Appeal held that the Act and the rules
were advisedly so worded that the decree absolute
should as far as is humanly possible, leave each
spouse free to make a new life for himself or herself
without being unjustly harassed by fresh claims
from a disgruntled ex-spouse which should have
been ventilated at the time the decree was being
made. This i s e s s e n t i a l l y t h e “ c l e a n b r e a k ”
principle, which is intended at encouraging the
parties to put the past behind them and to begin a
new life without being overshadowed by the
relationship that had broken down.
9
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
10
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
clerical mistakes. It is far reaching and changes the original term of the
decree nisi. Hence, on this too, the respondent wife fail.
In the Federal Court case of Hock Hua Bank Bhd v. Sahari bin
Murid [1981] I MLJ 143 it was held -
11
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
12
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
13
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
14
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
The Court also held that the Consent Decree Nisi is final and
conclusive and for all intents and purposes, it disposes of all issues
between the parties and parties are therefore not allowed to blow hot and
cold.
15
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
(b) Estoppel
Mokhtar Sidin JCA, delivering the judgment of the Court said the following
-
16
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
In Lau Hui Sing v. Wong Chuo Yong [2008] 5 MLJ 846, the
High Court held, inter alia at 853 that:-
17
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
18
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
19
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
20
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
In Geh Thuan Hooi (h) v. Serene Lim Paid Yan (w) [2010] 4
MLJ 673, the appellant husband consented before the Learned judge to
make payment of RM14,000.00 per month of the respondent wife as
maintenance for their two children who were minors. Later, the appellant
husband filed an application to seek for reduction of the monthly
maintenance payment from RM14,000.00 to RM2,500.00 on the ground
that it was an unintentional mistake as the appellant husband thought that
this amount was for his own monthly expenditure/responsibility. The High
Court dismissed his application and at page 681-682 was of the view that
at that time, the judge would never have recorded a consent judgment
without the full consent of both parties. It was highly improbable that there
was misrepresentation or mistake of fact. Furthermore, the appellant
husband, being educated and holding a high position, could not be
permitted to approbate and reprobate after agreeing to pay the amount.
Further, the fact that the application was made 12 months after the decree
nisi was granted clearly showed that the plea of misrepresentation and/or
mistake of fact was a mere afterthought.
21
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
embodied in the consent order, the consent was not given under a
misapprehension or from a misstatement or for want of materials.
22
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
In Phuah Beng Chooi @ Koh Kim Kee (P) & Ors. v. Koh Heng
Jin @ Koh Heng Leong & Ors [2007] 2 MLJ 458, the parties recorded
consent order. The terms include that Henry Butcher Malaysia Sdn. Bhd, is
to determine the valuation of the oil palm estates and based on the
valuation, KPMG will determine the respective amount due to each of the
vendors (referring to the plaintiffs, the 5th and 7th defendants) which amount
shall constitute the “respective purchase price” payable by the 2 nd
defendant as the purchaser. The Learned counsel for the plaintiffs was not
happy with the valuation report of Henry Butcher and the accountant’s
report of KPMG as there was a disparity of RM16million between the
valuation report of Henry Butcher and Colliers Jordan. The vendors filed a
summons in chambers to vary or set aside the consent order because of
the disparity between the reports of the 2 valuers. Abdul Malik Ishak J. (as
he then was) held at 458-459 that:
23
[2014] 1 LNS 1664 Legal Network Series
24