Tycoon's divorce proceedings against ex-Miss Malaysia can proceed in Malaysia

PUTRAJAYA: Business tycoon Tan Sri Khoo Kay Peng can proceed with his divorce petition against his wife, former Miss Malaysia Puan Sri Pauline Chai Siew Phin in Malaysian courts.
This follows the decision of the Federal Court's three-man bench today, led by Justice Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar to deny Chai leave to appeal against a Court of Appeal ruling.
On June 19, last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Malaysian courts had jurisdiction to hear Khoo's divorce petition.
The Court of Appeal had also decided that Chai, 69, did not have the right to choose her choice of domicile as common law rule stating that a wife's domicile must follow that of her husband, was constitutional and applicable in Malaysia.
Suriyadi, who presided on the panel with justices Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop and Datuk Zainun Ali unanimously dismissed Chai's application for leave to appeal and ordered her to pay RM20,000 in costs.
Chai, a former Miss Malaysia/International 1969 wanted the British court to decide on the divorce proceedings as she claimed she no longer stayed in Malaysia since 1980 and was currently living in England while Khoo, 77, wanted their divorce case to be heard by the Malaysian courts.
The couple was married in 1970 and have five grown-up children.
Khoo is chairman of international investment holdings company, Malayan United Industries Bhd and owns 44% of UK fashion and furnishings retailer Laura Ashley Holdings.
On Nov 28, 2014, the High Court in Kuala Lumpur ruled it had jurisdiction to hear Khoo's divorce petition and this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Meanwhile, Chai had filed the divorce petition in a London court on Feb 14, 2013, seeking a £500 million (RM2.75billion) settlement.
It was reported that Chai would get a smaller portion in matrimonial property if the case was decided, according to Malaysian law.
Chai's counsel, Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram earlier submitted there were three legal questions relating to the issue of common law rule on wife's domicile which the Federal Court should decide as it would be to public advantage.
He argued that his client's legal bid was not academic as the validity of the domicile rule would determine if Malaysian courts had jurisdiction over her.
Khoo's lawyer, Datuk Dr Cyrus Das said Chai's leave to appeal application was academic because she obtained a decree nisi from the London court on Jan 7, this year.
He said the legal questions posed by her counsel for the Federal Court to determine were no longer relevant to her since she had elected to get her relief from the London court.
Outside the court, Das told reporters that following the Federal Court's decision, the Court of Appeal judgement stood and his client would be allowed to proceed with his petition in Malaysia, which was filed in Dec 2014.
Meanwhile, Chai's lawyer, New Sin Yew told reporters that at the same time, financial proceedings were currently ongoing in the London court for the purpose of division of matrimonial assets. — Bernama