The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that as long as there is “no violation of any law”, non-Muslim married couples in Malaysia have the right to make decisions about their own relationships and lifestyle preferences according to their “unique needs, desires and circumstances”.
These include postnuptial agreements for a husband to keep a mistress during the subsistence of the marriage.
For illustration purposes
A wife who signed an agreement allowing her husband to keep a mistress filed for divorce
For illustration purposes
In the High Court’s judgment in Divorce Petition No: WA-33-30-01/2021, Justice Evrol Mariette Peters said that such an agreement holds statutory recognition under Section 56 of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976.
In an 87-page judgment of the divorce petition, she found that the petitioner, a wife identified as HLC, voluntarily entered into an accord with her husband, known as PTL, a month after their marriage on August 1997 for her husband to keep a mistress.
HLC, a Singapore-born woman and a graduate of the National University of Singapore (NUS), had in January 2021 petitioned for divorce, claiming that the ‘mistress agreement’ was not enforceable as it was executed while she was under ignorance and duress.
For illustration purposes
However, Judge Peters rejected HLC’s plea of ignorance as she not only put her initials on every page but the agreement was also signed in the presence of witnesses.
Under the agreement, the husband, a business tycoon who owned properties and vast business interests in Terengganu, is allowed to keep a mistress at any given time during the marriage.
In October 2020, HLC left the matrimonial home with their children – 3 sons aged 26, 25 and 18, and 2 daughters aged 23 and 21 – and relocated to Plaza Berjaya registered under PTL and his business partner’s name. She cited her husband’s adultery and unreasonable behaviour for doing so.
HLC then filed the petition for divorce and sought:
- Maintenance for herself and 2 of their children
- The equal division of matrimonial assets
- Damages from a co-respondent identified as GEN, whom she accused of committing adultery with her husband which in turn resulted in the breakdown of their marriage
For illustration purposes
The High Court granted the divorce and ordered the husband to pay maintenance
While the High Court judge ruled that maintaining a mistress was legal as per the prenuptial agreement, Judge Peters granted the couple a divorce and ordered the husband to pay the wife RM10,000 for spousal maintenance and another RM6,000 for the maintenance of their children.
She also ordered the distribution of the couple’s matrimonial assets, including immovable properties, vehicles, money and shares in companies.
The claim for damages from GEN was rejected, however, as there was no proof of adultery.
For illustration purposes
So, what do you guys think of this intriguing case? Share your thoughts with us in the comments!
