Sunday 10 December 2023

Kuasa Mahkamah mengarah ujian DNA untuk penentuan nasab?

 BSM lwn. BAA & SATU LAGI [2023] 1 CLJ 581

MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, TEMERLOH
ROSLAN MAT NOR PK
[SAMAN PEMULA NO: CB-24F-12-08-2022]
07 DECEMBER 2022

(i) Tiada undang-undang khusus di Malaysia tentang bidang kuasa mahkamah untuk mengarahkan seseorang menjalankan ujian DNA demi penentuan nasab. Walaupun apa-apa prinsip undang-undang yang terpakai di United Kingdom boleh diguna pakai di Malaysia, tertakluk pada pematuhan ketat s. 3(1) Akta Undang-undang Sivil 1956, prinsip undang-undang keluarga dalam bidang kuasa lain berkaitan nasab tidak sesuai diguna pakai dalam sistem perundangan di Malaysia untuk memutuskan kes ini.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGrcFbggpwpnLkGGFrXlPwDDjNz


JKL v. ABC & ANOR [2022] 7 CLJ 376
HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM
SM KOMATHY SUPPIAH J
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: BA-24F-363-11-2021]
24 MAY 2022

Notwithstanding the absence of any legislative provision in Malaysia on the power of the High Court to order DNA tests to determine paternity, a High Court Judge has inherent power to order a DNA test in disputed paternity cases. DNA testing ought to be ordered especially if the party claiming to be the father of the child has strong prima facie evidence that he is the biological father of the said child. It would also be in the best interest of a child to know his/her birth father/mother.


https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGqPzBWsWMQxwtHmTBmdQPWKqjv


CAS v. MPPL & ANOR [2022] 6 CLJ 713
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
FAIZAH JAMALUDIN J

[WRIT NO: WA-22F-1-05-2019 (ORIGINALLY ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: WA-24F-107-07-2015)]
21 JUNE 2022
 [2022] CLJ JT (7)

Case laws are replete with decisions that the courts are not seized with the power, in civil proceedings, to compel adults to produce deoxyribonucleic acid ('DNA') samples to prove the paternity of a child. However, it has never been discussed nor decided whether the courts could order for a child to undergo a DNA test to determine the child's paternity. In this distinctive judgment, a prima facie case was established as there was an avalanche of evidence that there existed sexual relations during the conception period of the child, between parties engaging in an extra-marital affair. Also present were overwhelming documentary evidence of an intimate relationship akin to that of a family unit. As it was in the best interest of the child to know her biological father, the child was accordingly ordered to undergo a DNA test to conclusively resolve the ambiguity as to her paternity.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGpHHKDKxnhJCqXPHKtHhdTDRQX


No comments:

Post a Comment

Pengelakan secara sengaja menjawab soalan dari operator insurans boleh menyebabkan tuntutan pampasan dibatalkan

  CHONG LAI KENG v. PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BHD   [2024] 1 CLJ 293 HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM JAMHIRAH ALI JC [CIVIL SUIT NO: BA-22N...