Tan Hong Gim v 1. ) Ooi Yong Por 2. ) Khaw Peh Ling

Case Significance

Illustrates the division of matrimonial assets and award of maintenance under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 on an irretrievable breakdown, and how the beneficial shares of a bankrupt spouse are made subject to realisation under the administration of the Insolvency Act 1967.

This High Court decision concerns a petition for the dissolution of a marriage of about twenty-four years under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, together with ancillary claims for custody, maintenance and the division of matrimonial assets. The petitioner alleged that the marriage had broken down irretrievably by reason of cruelty, habitual gambling, financial neglect and the involvement of loan sharks, and proceeded on her own testimony supported by the corroborative evidence of the children, while the respondent, despite many opportunities over several years of interlocutory skirmishing, filed no evidence at trial. The court, satisfied on the evidence of the irretrievable breakdown, granted the dissolution and turned to the ancillary relief. It ordered the respondent to pay maintenance for the youngest child, then a university student, at RM1,200 per month until completion of his first degree, emphasising the statutory duty under the Act to ensure that a parent contributes proportionately to a child's educational needs, including tertiary education; and it ordered spousal maintenance to the petitioner of RM2,000 per month for five years. On the division of matrimonial assets under section 76 of the Act, the court apportioned the jointly owned properties 60% to the petitioner and 40% to the respondent, and the properties held in the respondent's sole name 70% to the petitioner and 30% to the respondent, reflecting their respective contributions. Because the respondent was a bankrupt, the court directed that the percentages represented the parties' beneficial interests and that any realisation, transfer, sale or distribution of the respondent's share be undertaken in accordance with, and under the administration of, the Insolvency Act 1967. It awarded the petitioner costs of RM20,000. The court noted that the litigation had been marked by numerous interlocutory applications, adjournments and changes of counsel since 2018, and that, in the interest of justice and finality, it would not withhold its decision after a full trial merely because an interlocutory appeal remained pending, leaving it to the Court of Appeal to give any further consequential directions if that appeal succeeded. The judgment illustrates how the court divides matrimonial assets and orders maintenance where one spouse is bankrupt.