Jayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & Jamil
  • About
  • Our People
    • Partners
    • Consultant
    • Associates
  • Practice Areas
  • Publications
    • Legal Updates
    • Legal Cauldron (Temporary suspended)
    • Articles
    • News & Bulletin
  • We Care
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

Legal Update 6 of 2021

    Home Legal Updates Legal Update 6 of 2021
    NextPrevious

    Legal Update 6 of 2021

    By jhj admin | Legal Updates | 0 comment | 16 April, 2021 | 0

    Can the legitimate child of a father follow the surname of his mother?

    Case:

    TONG SEK EE v. HO SHU JOON & ANOR [2021] 3 CLJ 119

    Brief Facts:

    • Tong Sek Ee (“Mother”) and Ho Shu Joon (“Father”) were married in 2013 but the marriage did not last long.

     

    • In 2016, 4 days after she had given birth to their second child (“Child”), Mother filed for a divorce petition on the ground that the Father committed adultery with another woman.

     

    • When Child was born, Mother registered his name using her surname, “Tong”, and not that of the Father, “Ho”.

     

    • The marriage was eventually dissolved pursuant to a court order by consent (“Court Order”) where the parties agreed on matters pertaining to the custody, care and control of the children, maintenance, access and division of property.

     

    • The Child’s name spelt out in the Court Order followed the Mother’s surname.

     

    • The Father later filed applications at the High Court to vary the terms of his access to his children as well as to have the Child’s surname changed from “Tong” to “Ho”, to follow his surname.

     

    • To support his application, Father submitted, amongst others, that Child was his legitimate child and the Child’s surname should follow that of the father as provided for under section 13A(1) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 (“Act”) and what the Mother had done contravened the provisions of the Act.

     

    • Objecting to this, Mother argued that the Father was estopped from raising the issue of surname as he had agreed to relinquish his right to raise the issue in the future which was reflected in the draft consent order.

     

    • The High Court found in favour of the Father and the Mother appealed to the Court of Appeal.

    COURT OF APPEAL DECISION – APPEAL ALLOWED!

    The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on the following basis:

     

    • The language in section 13A(1) of the Act is plain, unambiguous and explicit and admits to one meaning only; if the Child is a legitimate child, ordinarily the surname of the father may be entered.

     

    • The word ‘ordinarily’ is an ordinary word which should be given its natural and ordinary meaning. The word does not carry any special meaning or attribute.

     

    • Based on dictionary definitions of the word ‘ordinarily’, what the Act simply means is that, usually or normally or in the normal course of event, the child’s surname should derive from his father.

     

    • However, at the same time, the Act does not preclude the Mother from registering Child’s name using her surname.

     

    • In other words, while the surname of a legitimate child is ordinarily derived from the father, the surname could also be derived from the mother.

     

    • If the word ‘ordinarily’ is absent from section 13A(1) of the Act, the Child’s surname must solely be that of the father.

     

    • Even though the Mother’s action in registering Child’s name did not seem to be in conformity with the express provision of section 13A(1) of the Act, the Father’s subsequent conduct gave a clear, unqualified indication of his intention to relinquish his right on the use of his surname.

     

    • Child was 10 months old when the Court Order was granted in 2018. Child’s name and his identity card number and the provision on maintenance of Child were all clearly spelt out in the Court Order. The Father knew then that his son did not carry his surname.
    No tags.

    jhj admin

    More posts by jhj admin

    Related Post

    • Legal Update 9 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can a civil servant be dismissed from employment by a local authority without affording him the right to be heard? Case: PIHAK BERKUASA TATATERTIB MAJLIS PERBANDARAN SEBERANG PERAI & ANOR v. MUZIADI MUKHTAR [2020] 1Read more

    • Legal Update 10 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can the payment of quit rent, assessment rates, electricity and water bills be used to prove ownership of property? Case: HS REALTY SDN BHD v. YOW HONG SOON [2020] 1 LNS 230 Brief Facts: HSRead more

    • Legal Update 11 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can accused persons who are convicted of disobeying the Movement Control Order appeal for alternative punishment instead of imprisonment in the interest of justice? Case: CHIN CHEE WEI & ANOR V PP [2020] 1 LNSRead more

    • Legal Update 12 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can a foreign national have a permanent contract of employment? Case: AHMAD ZAHRI MIRZA ABDUL HAMID v. AIMS CYBERJAYA SDN BHD [2020] 1 LNS 494 Brief Facts: Ahmad, an expatriate, received a letter of appointmentRead more

    • Legal Update 13 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can the giving of legal advice by an adjudged bankrupt, whose practising certificate has been suspended, amount to practising law in contravention of the Legal Profession Act 1976? Case: DARSHAN SINGH KHAIRA v. ZULKEFLI HASHIMRead more

    • Legal Update 14 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can individual parcel owners enforce rights relating to common property on their own behalf? Case: SYARIKAT EAST COAST & ORS v. MAKNA MUJUR SDN BHD & ORS [2020] 2 MLRA 440 Brief Facts: Syarikat EastRead more

    • Legal Update 15 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      When is the point of time when a debtor is considered to be unable to pay his debts? Case: AFFIN BANK BERHAD V. ABU BAKAR ISMAIL [2020] 2 MLRA 99 Brief Facts: Affin Bank BerhadRead more

    • Legal Update 16 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Whether an article containing allegations of corrupt practices and giving of bribes was defamatory to the owner of an education institution? Case: EAGLE ONE INVESTMENT LTD & ORS V. ASIA PACIFIC HIGHER LEARNING SDN BHDRead more

    Leave a Comment

    Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    NextPrevious

    JHJ Bulletin

    • S.Jeyaraman: The Magic of Memory
    • Andreas Dorn: Your Unconscious Mind on Change and Money

    Legal Updates

    • Legal Update 22 of 2022
    • Legal Update 21 of 2022
    • Legal Update 20 of 2022
    • Legal Update 19 of 2022
    • Legal Update 18 of 2022
    • Legal Update 17 of 2022
    • Legal Update 16 of 2022

    Legal Cauldron

    • 2
      0

      Legal Cauldron 1 of 2016

      Click here to view & download
    • 2
      0

      Legal Cauldron 2 of 2015

      Click here to view & download
    Copyright 2017 All Rights Reserved Contact Us         Like & Follow Us On:Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
    • About
    • Our People
      • Partners
      • Consultant
      • Associates
    • Practice Areas
    • Publications
      • Legal Updates
      • Legal Cauldron (Temporary suspended)
      • Articles
      • News & Bulletin
    • We Care
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
    Jayadeep Hari & Jamil