Wednesday 13 December 2023

Perintah Mahkamah Syariah hendaklah diterima sebagai keterangan di Mahkamah Sivil

 MOHD ISHA AWANG v. MOHAMAD IDRIS SERAMAL BARIS [2020] 9 CLJ 760

COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
KAMALUDIN MD SAID JCA; ABU BAKAR JAIS JCA; GUNALAN MUNIANDY JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: P-02(NCVC)(W)-2426-12-2018]
05 AUGUST 2020

An order of the Syariah Court of Appeal adjudicating that a marriage is not valid under the Syarak must be presumed to have been made according to the legitimate powers of the said court and must be taken as valid until proven otherwise; and more, upon the same being properly tendered and marked as an exhibit, its contents must be taken as true and undisputed. This being the case, it is erroneous of the learned Judicial Commissioner, after having admitted the order and marked it as an exhibit, to have then compelled the defendant adducer to prove the authenticity of the document inter alia by calling or examining the maker(s) thereof. Section 114(e) of the Evidence Act 1950 allows the court to presume that such judicial and official act of the Syariah Court of Appeal has been regularly performed with the result that the marriage between the plaintiff and the second defendant herein, on the facts and the evidence, and in consonance with the order of the Syariah Court of Appeal, must be held to be invalid. It follows that the appellant's claim for damages against the first defendant for allegedly enticing his 'wife', the second defendant, must crumble and fail.

TORT
Enticement - Claim for - Plaintiff alleged first defendant enticed his wife from matrimonial home causing breakdown of familial relationship - Whether there was valid marriage between plaintiff and wife - Whether there was order for judicial separation (faraq) from Syariah Court - Whether documents produced in court issued by Government department - Whether documents showed judicial and official acts had been performed - Whether Order of Syariah Court of Appeal adjudicating marriage between plaintiff and wife not valid according to 'syarak' made within court's powers - Whether documents proved marriage between plaintiff and wife dissolved by judicial separation - Whether presumption under s. 114(e) of Evidence Act 1950 applicable to documents - Whether claim for enticement ought to fail

EVIDENCE
Documents - Judicial separation - Order of - Whether there was valid marriage between plaintiff and wife - Whether there was order for judicial separation (faraq) from Syariah Court - Whether documents produced in court issued by Government department - Whether documents showed judicial and official acts had been performed - Whether Order of Syariah Court of Appeal adjudicating marriage between plaintiff and wife not valid according to 'syarak' made within court's powers - Whether documents proved marriage between plaintiff and wife dissolved by judicial separation - Whether presumption under s. 114(e) of Evidence Act 1950 applicable to documents

FAMILY LAW
Judicial separation - Documents - Whether there was an order for judicial separation (faraq) from Syariah Court - Whether documents produced in court issued by Government department - Whether documents showed judicial and official acts had been performed - Whether Order of Syariah Court of Appeal adjudicating marriage between plaintiff and wife not valid according to 'syarak' made within court's powers - Whether presumption under s. 114(e) of Evidence Act 1950 applicable to documents - Whether documents proved marriage between plaintiff and wife dissolved by judicial separation

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

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...