關於 had married or had been married ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

翻轉視界 18 Changing Perspective

There's not just one road to the destination, but many roads. You just need to take the little step that’s right in front of you, and then the next one, and a few years down the track, they will seem like massive achievements.

通往目的地的路不止一條，有很多路可走。你只需要邁出眼前這一小步，然後再邁出下一步，幾年下來，將會成為巨大成就。

文章來自於New Humans of Australia (有取得授權)

★★★★★★★★★★★★

I didn’t meet my father until I was 6 years old. My parents had a comfortable, middle-class life in Shanghai, or as close as you could get under communism. But they always wanted to live overseas, and just before I was born, my dad came to Sydney to set things up. I don’t know why, but in the end, my mother and I didn’t join him until I was 6.

•a middle-class life 中產階級生活
•set things up 打點一切
•live overseas 往海外生活
•in the end 最後 (表達在經過一段時間或一連串事件之後的結果)

直到六歲前我都未曾見過父親。我的雙親在上海過著舒適的中產階級生活，或著說，在共產階級下所能得到的最接近的生活。他們一直響往海外生活，就在我出生前，我父親來到雪梨打點一切。但不知何故，直到六歲那年我與母親才終於與父親團聚。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

Unfortunately, half a year after we arrived, he left us. That was a huge shock. Our transition had already been quite difficult, as we both didn't speak English. Also, as Shanghai was such a big bustling city, Sydney felt a bit like the countryside, especially on the weekends, as no shops were open back then!

•shock 令人震驚的事件（或經歷）；驚愕，震驚 (come as a great shock 讓人倍感震驚)
•transition 轉變；過渡
•a bustling city 繁華都會

不幸的是，就在我跟母親抵達半年後，父親離開了我們。這是個巨大的打擊，因爲我們不會說英文，在適應過渡期本就已過得相當艱辛。此外，不同於上海的繁華都會，雪梨更像鄉下，尤其在週末，那時連商店都不開門。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

We were very much reliant on my dad, not only financially, but also as a conduit into the wider community. So to have that broken was quite distressing. I remember Mum crying a lot. As we had become socially isolated, we didn’t find out anything about Centrelink, so we survived on her savings for a while, and then got some help from her family back in China.

•be reliant on… 依賴...
•a conduit into 進入...的渠道
•distressing (adj.) 令人苦惱的,令人擔憂的
•become socially isolated 變得孤立於社會
•survive on her savings 僅靠的她積蓄過日子

我們相當依賴我父親，不僅是經濟，他也是我們進入更廣泛社區的渠道。因此，當局面被打破時令人相當痛苦，我還記得母親時常哭泣。由於我們孤立於社會，所以我們並不知道澳洲社會福利聯絡中心 （Centrelink）的任何資訊，僅靠母親的積蓄支撐了一段時間，然後從母親在中國的娘家得到一些幫助。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

Eventually, Mum moved us down to Melbourne, where we were able to make some new networks and family friendships. But I was bullied a bit at school about things like my food and clothing! Whenever someone bullied me, I would defend myself, but because I didn’t have the language skills to explain to the teacher why, I got in trouble quite a bit. I ended up having to move school 3 times before I came to Balwyn Primary School, which was relatively multicultural.

•be able to 能夠
•make new networks 建立新的人脈，關係網
•be bullied 被霸凌
•language skills 語言能力
•get in trouble 惹上麻煩
•end up 最後處於；最後成爲；以…告終
•relatively 相對地
•multicultural 多元文化的

最後，母親帶著我搬遷到墨爾本，在那我們能夠建立起新的網絡與家庭情誼。然而。我在學校飽受霸凌，例如我的食物及衣物。每當有人霸凌我，我會自我防衛，但我的語言技巧不足以向老師解釋事發原因，因此常常陷入麻煩。後來我不得不再三轉學，直到就讀相對多元文化的博文小學（Balwyn Primary School）。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

After that, I did alright. Music featured very prominently in my life. I had started learning the violin from the age of 2.5 years old and even with all the troubles that were going on in my life, had somehow still kept up with it. As a result, I got a music scholarship to Trinity Grammar School. But even there I used to get into quite a lot of mischief, and would often skip school to go to the movies.

•do alight 過得不錯，做的不錯
•feature (v.) 以…為特色；給…以顯著的地位
•prominently 重要地；著名地；突出地，顯眼地

之後，我便過得不錯。音樂在我生活中佔有重要的一席之地，我從兩歲半開始學習小提琴，儘管生活中事事不如意，我依然堅持不輟。因此，我獲得三一文法學校（ Trinity Grammar School）的音樂獎學金。但即使在那，我也常惡作劇、逃學看電影。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

By the end of year 11, I was told I would have to either repeat the year, or consider going to another school, which was quite humiliating for my mum. I decided to move school and surprisingly, I ended up doing quite well in year 12! As a result, I ended up getting into a double degree in Law and Music at Monash.

•repeat the year 留級 ; 重唸一年
•humiliating 令人感到恥辱的，丟臉的

11年級結束時，我被告知要麽被留級，要麼考慮轉學，這對我母親來說相當丟人。我決定轉學，而令人驚訝的是，我在12年級的時候表現優異，最後錄取蒙納士大學法律與音樂雙學位。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

When I started, my first thought was that I didn’t belong because I had done so badly in school up to year 11 and everyone else seemed so smart. But I put my head down, got through it, and ended up getting a job in the legal department of a major manufacturing company, which was a different approach to what most law students do.

•do not belong 不屬於這
•put my head down 埋頭苦幹
•the legal department of ...的法律部門
•a different approach 不同途徑
•approach （思考問題的）方式，方法，態度

當我開始進入大學，最初的想法是我不屬於這，因為我在11年級前都表現不佳，而這裡的人似乎都聰明絕頂。但我埋頭苦幹，咬牙撐過，最後在一家大型製造公司的法律部門找到工作，這與多數法律系學生的途徑不同。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

I really enjoyed it. It was hard work, but I learned a lot of foundational business, legal and corporate communication skills. After that I worked in corporate governance in RMIT, then started to moonlight as a lecturer in the Law Faculty. Eventually, they asked me if I wanted to do a PhD and I blindly said yes! I next worked at Swinburne University, and then was head-hunted to lead the corporate legal team at the Commercial Passenger Vehicles Commission.

•foundational 基礎的
•communication skills 溝通技巧
•corporate governance
•moonlight (v.) （尤指瞞著僱主）從事第二職業，兼職
•headhunt (v.) 物色（人才）； 挖角
•legal team 法律團隊

我非常喜歡這份工作，這是份辛苦的工作，但我學習了很多基礎商業、法律以及公司溝通技巧。之後我在皇家墨爾本理工大學（ RMIT）從事公司治理工作，並開始兼職擔任法律系講師。後來他們問我是否想要讀博士，我便盲目地答應了。接下來，我在斯威本大學（Swinburne University）工作，再被挖角到商用小客車委員會領導法律團隊。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

I had a good life, but after a while, I realised I wanted a different kind of job. I could see my seniors were making a lot of money but that their family life was not that good. And looking at my own upbringing, I wanted to be the kind of father who could be present in my own kids’ lives. So I decided on dentistry. It would not only allow me to use the hand skills that I had developed from playing the violin, but also the analytical and reasoning skills that I'd developed in law. Plus it would be flexible, and offer me a stable income and the chance to meet different people every day!

•upbringing 教養
•decide on sth 決定某事或東西
•analytical and reasoning skills 分析和推理能力
•offer a stable income 提供穩定收入

我的生活很不錯，但一段時間後，我意識到自己想要一份不同的工作。我知道前輩們賺了很多錢，但他們的家庭生活並不美滿。看著自己的成長經歷，我想要成為可以在孩子生活中出席的父親，所以我決定改行當牙醫。這項職業能讓我使用從拉小提琴中發展出的手部技巧，也能運用我在法律中發展出的分析與推理技能。此外，這個職業相當靈活，能為我提供穩定收入，並有機會每天與不同的人見面。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

My now fiancée, who was my girlfriend at the time, was also applying for further study, and coincidentally we both got into university in South Australia, so we moved to Adelaide together a few years ago.

•fiancée 未婚妻
•at the time 當時
•apply for 申請
•further study 繼續教育，進修；進一步研究；深造
•coincidentally 碰巧地；巧合地

我的未婚妻，當時的女友，也申請繼續深造，巧的是我們都考上南澳大學（University of South Australia)，所以幾年前一起搬到阿得雷德（ Adelaide）。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

I was lucky to get a university job at Flinders University. Initially, I started out as a casual lecturer in the law school, but I’ve since transitioned into teaching health law and research, and I’m currently writing a few books on the intersection between law and medicine. And also, obviously, trying to finish my dentistry degree!

•start out as… 起初擔任...
•transition into… 轉變到...

我很幸運的在福林德斯大學（Flinders University）找到工作，起初我在法學院擔任臨時講師，但我後來轉換到醫事法教學及研究。目前我正撰寫幾本關於法律與醫學相接的書籍，並努力完成我的牙醫學位。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

Mum eventually retrained as a Chinese high school teacher, and she’s still teaching to this day. Like most first generation migrants, she struggled quite a lot, and invested heavily in my success. After we’re married, my fiancée and I are planning to have children, and I’m sure they will have it much easier than I did.

•retrain 重新培養；再培訓；再訓練
•to this day 至今
•first generation migrants 第一代移民
•struggle a lot 掙扎奮鬥許久
•have it much easier 過的比較輕鬆

我的母親最終重新接受培訓，成為一名中文高中老師並執教至今。如同大多數第一代移民，她掙扎奮鬥許久，並為我的成功投資甚多。我與未婚妻打算婚後生孩子，我確信孩子會過的比我輕鬆得多。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

Still, a lot of the failures that I’ve had in my life have really informed a lot of my successes. Looking back, I wouldn't really want to change that to have a smoother life.

•inform [正式] 影響某人的態度或意見
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/inform

•have a smoother life 有一個更順遂的人生

我的生活中的種種失敗確實為我的成功提供借鑑。回首過去，我不會想要改變那些坎坷經歷去擁有一個更順遂的人生。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

Over the years, I've learned that perseverance is very important. I hope that through telling my story, I can be an example to others who might be in a similar position as I was: to show that there's not just one road to the destination, but many roads. You just need to take the little step that’s right in front of you, and then the next one, and a few years down the track, they will seem like massive achievements.

•over the years 多年來
•perseverance 不屈不撓，堅持不懈
•be an example 成為榜樣
•be in a similar position 處於相似的處境
•down the road/line/track 將來(的路)

多年來，我學到堅持不懈是至關重要的。我希望透過講述自己的故事，能成為其他可能與我有相似處境的人的榜樣：向他們展示通往目的地的路不止一條，有很多路可走。你只需要邁出眼前這一小步，然後再邁出下一步，幾年下來，將會成為巨大成就。

有興趣的同學可以支持New Humans of Australia

www.patreon.com/newhumansofaustralia

Photographer: Paul Heinrich instagram.com/paulfheinrich

文章與圖片出處: https://bit.ly/2XJsciq

★★★★★★★★★★★★

翻轉視界: http://bit.ly/3fPvKUs

批判性思考問題大全: http://bit.ly/34rdtJ7

"Pastor Prince, I first heard about your ministry some years ago when I was locked up in prison. My mother shared with me about your teachings on the gospel of grace and God’s love for me. I would love to tell you that when I got released from prison I ran back to God and started living right, but I did no such thing.

Drugs and alcohol had such a hold on my life that it seemed as though I would die with a needle in my arm or a bottle in my hand or both. After many bad decisions, I was at a place where I had reached rock bottom. I had failed at being a wife, mother, daughter, friend, and person. I was completely lost and broken.

One day, I remembered your sermons and began to watch them daily. They filled me with the hope and knowledge that Jesus loves me and died for my sins so that I can be brought into His family. I realized that God was not angry with me and loves me more than I can imagine.

Today I have been free from heroin for two years and alcohol for over a year. I have seen my life change dramatically just by trusting in God and being conscious of His love for me instead of being conscious of my sins. The Lord is continually changing me from the inside out and helping me grow.

My relationship with my parents and son have been restored in full. I also have a wonderful, godly man in my life who prays for me and watches your sermons together with me. We plan on getting married and buying a house soon. I’m also planning to go back to school to become a paralegal and help others who are as lost as I was.

Thank you, Pastor Prince, for your ministry. I still listen to your messages daily and have been deeply blessed by them. They have brought me back to the love of Jesus, who saved my life."

Heather Doty | Texas, United States

—
Beloved, what God has done for others, He wants to do for you as well. As you read this story, I pray that it builds up your faith with the confident expectation of good for your future. Be encouraged because your breakthrough is next!

Visit JosephPrince.com/stories to read more stories like this. #JosephPrince #JosephPrinceStories #StoriesOfVictory

這是前些日子爆出已經被加拿大法院接理對藏傳佛教噶舉派法王的訟訴。（加拿大法院鏈接在此：https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/21/09/2021BCSC0939cor1.htm?fbclid=IwAR2FLZlzmUIGTBaTuKPVchEqqngcE3Qy6G_C0TWNWVKa2ksbIYkVJVMQ8f8）

這位法王的桃色事件，我是幾年前才聽到。但，藏傳佛教的高層有這些性醜聞，我已經聽了幾十年。我以前的一位前女友也被一些堪布藉故上她的家摟抱過，也有一些活佛跟她表白。（這不只是她，其他地方我也聽過不少）

這是一個藏傳佛教裡面系統式的問題。

很多時候發生這種事情，信徒和教主往往都是說女方得不到寵而報仇，或者說她們也精神病，或者說她們撒謊。

我不排除有這種可能性，但，多過一位，甚至多位出來指證的時候，我是傾向於相信『沒有那麼巧這麼多有精神病的女人要撒謊來報仇』。

大寶法王的桃色事件，最先吹哨的是一位台灣的在家信徒，第二位是香港的女出家人，現在加拿大又多一位公開舉報上法庭。

對大寶法王信徒來說，這一次的比較麻煩，因為是有孩子的。（關於有孩子的，我早在法王的桃色事件曝光時，就有聽聞）

如果法庭勒令要驗證DNA，這對法王和他的信徒來說，會很尷尬和矛盾，因為做或不做，都死。

你若問我，我覺得『人數是有力量的』，同時我也覺得之後有更多的人站出來，是不出奇的。

我也藉此呼籲各方佛教徒，如果你們真的愛佛教，先別說批判，但如鴕鳥般不討論這些爭議，你是間接害了佛教。

（下面是我從加拿大法院鏈接拷貝下來的內容，當中有很多細節。）

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

ANALYSIS

A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?

F. Delay / Prejudice

CONCLUSION



INTRODUCTION
[1] The claimant applies to amend her notice of family claim to seek spousal support. At issue is whether the claimant’s allegations give rise to a reasonable claim she lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship, so as to give rise to a potential entitlement to spousal support under the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25 (“FLA”).

[2] The facts alleged by the claimant do not fit within a traditional concept of marriage. The claimant does not allege that she and the respondent ever lived together. Indeed, she has only met the respondent in person four times: twice very briefly in a public setting; a third time in private, when she alleges the respondent sexually assaulted her; and a fourth and final occasion, when she informed the respondent she was pregnant with his child.

[3] The claimant’s case is that what began as a non-consensual sexual encounter evolved into a loving and affectionate relationship. That relationship occurred almost entirely over private text messages. The parties rarely spoke on the telephone, and never saw one another during the relationship, even over video. The claimant says they could not be together because the respondent is forbidden by his station and religious beliefs from intimate relationships or marriage. Nonetheless, she alleges, they formed a marriage-like relationship that lasted from January 2018 to January 2019.

[4] The respondent denies any romantic relationship with the claimant. While he acknowledges providing emotional and financial support to the claimant, he says it was for the benefit of the child the claimant told him was his daughter.

[5] The claimant’s proposed amendment raises a novel question: can a secret relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world be like a marriage? In my view, that question should be answered by a trial judge after hearing all of the evidence. The alleged facts give rise to a reasonable claim the claimant lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship. Accordingly, I grant the claimant leave to amend her notice of family claim.

BACKGROUND
[6] It should be emphasized that this is an application to amend pleadings only. The allegations by the claimant are presumed to be true for the purposes of this application. Those allegations have not been tested in a court of law.

[7] The respondent, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, is a high lama of the Karma Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism. He has been recognized and enthroned as His Holiness, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Without meaning any disrespect, I will refer to him as Mr. Dorje in these reasons for judgment.

[8] Mr. Dorje leads a monastic and nomadic lifestyle. His true home is Tibet, but he currently resides in India. He receives followers from around the world at the Gyuto Monetary in India. He also travels the world teaching Tibetan Buddhist Dharma and hosting pujas, ceremonies at which Buddhists express their gratitude and devotion to the Buddha.

[9] The claimant, Vikki Hui Xin Han, is a former nun of Tibetan Buddhism. Ms. Han first encountered Mr. Dorje briefly at a large puja in 2014. The experience of the puja convinced Ms. Han she wanted to become a Buddhist nun. She met briefly with Mr. Dorje, in accordance with Kagyu traditions, to obtain his approval to become a nun.

[10] In October 2016, Ms. Han began a three-year, three-month meditation retreat at a monastery in New York State. Her objective was to learn the practices and teachings of the Kagyu Lineage. Mr. Dorje was present at the retreat twice during the time Ms. Han was at the monastery.

[11] Ms. Han alleges that on October 14, 2017, Mr. Dorje sexually assaulted her in her room at the monastery. She alleges that she became pregnant from the assault.

[12] After she learned that she was pregnant, Ms. Han requested a private audience with Mr. Dorje. In November 2017, in the presence of his bodyguards, Ms. Han informed Mr. Dorje she was pregnant with his child. Mr. Dorje initially denied responsibility; however, he provided Ms. Han with his email address and a cellphone number, and, according to Ms. Han, said he would “prepare some money” for her.

[13] Ms. Han abandoned her plan to become a nun, left the retreat and returned to Canada. She never saw Mr. Dorje again.

[14] After Ms. Han returned to Canada, she and Mr. Dorje began a regular communication over an instant messaging app called Line. They also exchanged emails and occasionally spoke on the telephone.

[15] The parties appear to have expressed care and affection for one another in these communications. I say “appear to” because it is difficult to fully understand the meaning and intentions of another person from brief text messages, especially those originally written in a different language. The parties wrote in a private shorthand, sharing jokes, emojis, cartoon portraits and “hugs” or “kisses”. Ms. Han was the more expressive of the two, writing more frequently and in longer messages. Mr. Dorje generally participated in response to questions or prompting from Ms. Han, sometimes in single word messages.

[16] Ms. Han deposes that she believed Mr. Dorje was in love with her and that, by January 2018, she and Mr. Dorje were living in a “conjugal relationship”.

[17] During their communications, Ms. Han expressed concern that her child would be “illegitimate”. She appears to have asked Mr. Dorje to marry her, and he appears to have responded that he was “not ready”.

[18] Throughout 2018, Mr. Dorje transferred funds in various denominations to Ms. Han through various third parties. Ms. Han deposes that these funds were:

a) $50,000 CDN to deliver the child and for postpartum care she was to receive at a facility in Seattle;

b) $300,000 CDN for the first year of the child’s life;

c) $20,000 USD for a wedding ring, because Ms. Han wrote “Even if we cannot get married, you must buy me a wedding ring”;

d) $400,000 USD to purchase a home for the mother and child.

[19] On June 19, 2018, Ms. Han gave birth to a daughter in Richmond, B.C.

[20] On September 17, 2018, Mr. Dorje wrote, ”Taking care of her and you are my duty for life”.

[21] Ms. Han’s expectation was that the parties would live together in the future. She says they planned to live together. Those plans evolved over time. Initially they involved purchasing a property in Toronto, so that Mr. Dorje could visit when he was in New York. They also discussed purchasing property in Calgary or renting a home in Vancouver for that purpose. Ms. Han eventually purchased a condominium in Richmond using funds provided by Mr. Dorje.

[22] Ms. Han deposes that the parties made plans for Mr. Dorje to visit her and meet the child in Richmond. In October 2018, however, Mr. Dorje wrote that he needed to “disappear” to Europe. He wrote:

I will definitely find a way to meet her

And you

Remember to take care of yourself if something happens

[23] The final plan the parties discussed, according to Ms. Han, was that Mr. Dorje would sponsor Ms. Han and the child to immigrate to the United States and live at the Kagyu retreat centre in New York State.

[24] In January 2019, Ms. Han lost contact with Mr. Dorje.

[25] Ms. Han commenced this family law case on July 17, 2019, seeking child support, a declaration of parentage and a parentage test. She did not seek spousal support.

[26] Ms. Han first proposed a claim for spousal support in October 2020 after a change in her counsel. Following an exchange of correspondence concerning an application for leave to amend the notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s counsel wrote that Ms. Han would not be advancing a spousal support claim. On March 16, 2020, counsel reversed course, and advised that Ms. Han had instructed him to proceed with the application.

[27] When this application came on before me, the trial was set to commence on June 7, 2021. The parties were still in the process of discoveries and obtaining translations for hundreds of pages of documents in Chinese characters.

[28] At a trial management conference on May 6, 2021, noting the parties were not ready to proceed, Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to April 11, 2022.

ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
[29] To claim spousal support in this case, Ms. Han must plead that she lived with Mr. Dorje in a marriage-like relationship. This is because only “spouses” are entitled to spousal support, and s. 3 of the Family Law Act defines a spouse as a person who is married or has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship:

3 (1) A person is a spouse for the purposes of this Act if the person

(a) is married to another person, or

(b) has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship, and

(i) has done so for a continuous period of at least 2 years, or

(ii) except in Parts 5 [Property Division] and 6 [Pension Division], has a child with the other person.

[30] Because she alleges she has a child with Mr. Dorje, Ms. Han need not allege that the relationship endured for a continuous period of two years to claim spousal support; but she must allege that she lived in a marriage-like relationship with him at some point in time. Accordingly, she must amend the notice of family claim.

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
[31] Given that the notice of trial has been served, Ms. Han requires leave of the court to amend the notice of family claim: Supreme Court Family Rule 8-1(1)(b)(i).

[32] A person seeking to amend a notice of family claim must show that there is a reasonable cause of action. This is a low threshold. What the applicant needs to establish is that, if the facts pleaded are proven at trial, they would support a reasonable claim. The applicant’s allegations of fact are assumed to be true for the purposes of this analysis. Cantelon v. Wall, 2015 BCSC 813, at para. 7-8.

[33] The applicant’s delay, the reasons for the delay, and the prejudice to the responding party are also relevant factors. The ultimate consideration is whether it would be just and convenient to allow the amendment. Cantelon, at para. 6, citing Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al (1986), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282.

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
[34] Supreme Court Family Rules 3-1(1) and 4-1(1) require that a claim to spousal support be pleaded in a notice of family claim in Form F3. Section 2 of Form F3, “Spousal relationship history”, requires a spousal support claimant to check the boxes that apply to them, according to whether they are or have been married or are or have been in a marriage-like relationship. Where a claimant alleges a marriage-like relationship, Form F3 requires that they provide the date on which they began to live together with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship and, where applicable, the date on which they separated. Form F3 does not require a statement of the factual basis for the claim of spousal support.

[35] In this case, Ms. Han seeks to amend the notice of family claim to allege that she and Mr. Dorje began to live in a marriage-like relationship in or around January 2018, and separated in or around January 2019.

[36] An allegation that a person lived with a claimant in a marriage-like relationship is a conclusion of law, not an allegation of fact. Unlike the rules governing pleadings in civil actions, however, the Supreme Court Family Rules do not expressly require family law claimants to plead the material facts in support of conclusions of law.

[37] In other words, there is no express requirement in the Supreme Court Family Rules that Ms. Han plead the facts on which she relies for the allegation she and Mr. Dorje lived in a marriage-like relationship.

[38] Rule 4-6 authorizes a party to demand particulars, and then apply to the court for an order for further and better particulars, of a matter stated in a pleading. However, unless and until she is granted leave and files the proposed amended notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s allegation of a marriage-like relationship is not a matter stated in a pleading.

[39] Ms. Han filed an affidavit in support of her application to amend the notice of family claim. Normally, evidence would not be required or admissible on an application to amend a pleading. However, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the parties agreed I may look to Ms. Han’s affidavit and exhibits for the facts she pleads in support of the allegation of a marriage-like relationship.

[40] Because this is an application to amend - and Ms. Han’s allegations of fact are presumed to be true - I have not considered Mr. Dorje’s responding affidavit.

[41] Relying on affidavit evidence for an application to amend pleadings is less than ideal. It tends to merge and confuse the material facts with the evidence that would be relied on to prove those facts. In a number of places in her affidavit, for example, Ms. Han describes her feelings, impressions and understandings. A person’s hopes and intentions are not normally material facts unless they are mutual or reasonably held. The facts on which Ms. Han alleges she and Mr. Dorje formed a marriage-like relationship are more important for the present purposes than her belief they entered into a conjugal union.

[42] Somewhat unusually, in this case, almost all of the parties’ relevant communications were in writing. This makes it somewhat easier to separate the facts from the evidence; however, as stated above, it is difficult to understand the intentions and actions of a person from brief text messages.

[43] In my view, it would be a good practice for applicants who seek to amend their pleadings in family law cases to provide opposing counsel and the court with a schedule of the material facts on which they rely for the proposed amendment.

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
[44] As Mr. Justice Myers observed in Mother 1 v. Solus Trust Company, 2019 BCSC 200, the concept of a marriage-like relationship is elastic and difficult to define. This elasticity is illustrated by the following passage from Yakiwchuk v. Oaks, 2003 SKQB 124, quoted by Myers J. at para. 133 of Mother 1:

[10] Spousal relationships are many and varied. Individuals in spousal relationships, whether they are married or not, structure their relationships differently. In some relationships there is a complete blending of finances and property - in others, spouses keep their property and finances totally separate and in still others one spouse may totally control those aspects of the relationship with the other spouse having little or no knowledge or input. For some couples, sexual relations are very important - for others, that aspect may take a back seat to companionship. Some spouses do not share the same bed. There may be a variety of reasons for this such as health or personal choice. Some people are affectionate and demonstrative. They show their feelings for their “spouse” by holding hands, touching and kissing in public. Other individuals are not demonstrative and do not engage in public displays of affection. Some “spouses” do everything together - others do nothing together. Some “spouses” vacation together and some spend their holidays apart. Some “spouses” have children - others do not. It is this variation in the way human beings structure their relationships that make the determination of when a “spousal relationship” exists difficult to determine. With married couples, the relationship is easy to establish. The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of their commitment and intent. Relationships outside marriage are much more difficult to ascertain. Rarely is there any type of “public” declaration of intent. Often people begin cohabiting with little forethought or planning. Their motivation is often nothing more than wanting to “be together”. Some individuals have chosen to enter relationships outside marriage because they did not want the legal obligations imposed by that status. Some individuals have simply given no thought as to how their relationship would operate. Often the date when the cohabitation actually began is blurred because people “ease into” situations, spending more and more time together. Agreements between people verifying when their relationship began and how it will operate often do not exist.

[45] In Mother 1, Mr. Justice Myers referred to a list of 22 factors grouped into seven categories, from Maldowich v. Penttinen, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), that have frequently been cited in this and other courts for the purpose of determining whether a relationship was marriage-like, at para. 134 of Mother 1:

1. Shelter:

(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?

(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?

(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?

2. Sexual and Personal Behaviour:

(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?

(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?

(c) What were their feelings toward each other?

(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?

(e) Did they eat their meals together?

(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?

(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?

3. Services:

What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:

(a) preparation of meals;

(b) washing and mending clothes;

(c) shopping;

(d) household maintenance; and

(e) any other domestic services?

4. Social:

(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?

(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?

5. Societal:

What was the attitude and conduct of the community toward each of them and as a couple?

6. Support (economic):

(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution toward the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?

(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?

(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?

7. Children:

What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?

[46] In Austin v. Goerz, 2007 BCCA 586, the Court of Appeal cautioned against a “checklist approach”; rather, a court should "holistically" examine all the relevant factors. Cases like Molodowich provide helpful indicators of the sorts of behaviour that society associates with a marital relationship, the Court of Appeal said; however, “the presence or absence of any particular factor cannot be determinative of whether a relationship is marriage-like” (para. 58).

[47] In Weber v. Leclerc, 2015 BCCA 492, the Court of Appeal again affirmed that there is no checklist of characteristics that will be found in all marriages and then concluded with respect to evidence of intentions:

[23] The parties’ intentions – particularly the expectation that the relationship will be of lengthy, indeterminate duration – may be of importance in determining whether a relationship is “marriage-like”. While the court will consider the evidence expressly describing the parties’ intentions during the relationship, it will also test that evidence by considering whether the objective evidence is consonant with those intentions.

[24] The question of whether a relationship is “marriage-like” will also typically depend on more than just their intentions. Objective evidence of the parties’ lifestyle and interactions will also provide direct guidance on the question of whether the relationship was “marriage-like”.

[48] Significantly for this case, the courts have looked to mutual intent in order to find a marriage-like relationship. See, for example, L.E. v. D.J., 2011 BCSC 671 and Buell v. Unger, 2011 BCSC 35; Davey Estate v. Gruyaert, 2005 CarswellBC 3456 at 13 and 35.

[49] In Mother 1, Myers J. concluded his analysis of the law with the following learned comment:

[143] Having canvassed the law relating to the nature of a marriage-like relationship, I will digress to point out the problematic nature of the concept. It may be apparent from the above that determining whether a marriage-like relationship exists sometimes seems like sand running through one's fingers. Simply put, a marriage-like relationship is akin to a marriage without the formality of a marriage. But as the cases mentioned above have noted, people treat their marriages differently and have different conceptions of what marriage entails.

[50] In short, the determination of whether the parties in this case lived in a marriage-like relationship is a fact-specific inquiry that a trial judge would need to make on a “holistic” basis, having regard to all of the evidence. While the trial judge may consider the various factors listed in the authorities, those factors would not be treated as a checklist and no single factor or category of factors would be treated as being decisive.

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
[51] In this case, many of the Molodowich factors are missing:

a) The parties never lived under the same roof. They never slept together. They were never in the same place at the same time during the relationship. The last time they saw each other in person was in November 2017, before the relationship began.

b) The parties never had consensual sex. They did not hug, kiss or hold hands. With the exception of the alleged sexual assault, they never touched one another physically.

c) The parties expressed care and affection for one another, but they rarely shared personal information or interest in their lives outside of their direct topic of communication. They did not write about their families, their friends, their religious beliefs or their work.

d) They expressed concern and support for one another when the other felt unwell or experienced health issues, but they did not provide any care or assistance during illness or other problems.

e) They did not assist one another with domestic chores.

f) They did not share their relationship with their peers or their community. There is no allegation, for example, that Mr. Dorje told his fellow monks or any of his followers about the relationship. There is no allegation that Ms. Han told her friends or any co-workers. Indeed, there is no allegation that anyone, with the exception of Ms. Han’s mother, knew about the relationship. Although Mr. Dorje gave Ms. Han’s mother a gift, he never met the mother and he never spoke to her.

g) They did not intend to have a child together. The child was conceived as a result of a sexual assault. While Mr. Dorje expressed interest in “meeting” the child, he never followed up. He currently has no relationship with the child. There is no allegation he has sought access or parenting arrangements.

[52] The only Molodowich factor of any real relevance in this case is economic support. Mr. Dorje provided the funds with which Ms. Han purchased a condominium. Mr. Dorje initially wrote that he wanted to buy a property with the money, but, he wrote, “It’s the same thing if you buy [it]”.

[53] Mr. Dorje also provided a significant amount of money for Ms. Han’s postpartum care and the child’s first year of life.

[54] This financial support may have been primarily for the benefit of the child. Even the condominium, Ms. Han wrote, was primarily for the benefit of the child.

[55] However, in my view, a trial judge may attach a broader significance to the financial support from Mr. Dorje than child support alone. A trial judge may find that the money Mr. Dorje provided to Ms. Han at her request was an expression of his commitment to her in circumstances in which he could not commit physically. The money and the gifts may be seen by the trial judge to have been a form of down payment by Mr. Dorje on a promise of continued emotional and financial support for Ms. Han, or, in Mr. Dorje’s own words, “Taking care of her and you are my duty for life” (emphasis added).

[56] On the other hand, I find it difficult to attach any particular significance to the fact that Mr. Dorje agreed to provide funds for Ms. Han to purchase a wedding ring. It appears to me that Ms. Han demanded that Mr. Dorje buy her a wedding ring, not that the ring had any mutual meaning to the parties as a marriage symbol. But it is relevant, in my view, that Mr. Dorje provided $20,000 USD to Ms. Han for something she wanted that was of no benefit to the child.

[57] Further, Ms. Han alleges that the parties intended to live together. At a minimum, a trial judge may find that the discussions about where Ms. Han and the child would live reflected a mutual intention of the parties to see one another and spend time together when they could.

[58] Mr. Dorje argues that an intention to live together at some point in the future is not sufficient to show that an existing relationship was marriage-like. He argues that the question of whether the relationship was marriage-like requires more than just intentions, citing Weber, supra.

[59] In my view, the documentary evidence referred to above provides some objective evidence in this case that the parties progressed beyond mere intentions. As stated, the parties appear to have expressed genuine care and affection for one another. They appear to have discussed marriage, trust, honesty, finances, mutual obligations and acquiring family property. These are not matters one would expect Mr. Dorje to discuss with a friend or a follower, or even with the mother of his child, without a marriage-like element of the relationship.

[60] A trial judge may find on the facts alleged by Ms. Han that the parties loved one another and would have lived together, but were unable to do so because of Mr. Dorje’s religious duties and nomadic lifestyle.

[61] The question I raised in the introduction to these reasons is whether a relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world can be marriage-like.

[62] Notably, the definition of a spouse in the Family Law Act does not require that the parties live together, only that they live with another person in a marriage-like relationship.

[63] In Connor Estate, 2017 BCSC 978, Mr. Justice Kent found that a couple that maintained two entirely separate households and never lived under the same roof formed a marriage-like relationship. (Connor Estate was decided under the intestacy provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, S.B.C. 2009, c. 13 ("WESA"), but courts have relied on cases decided under WESA and the FLA interchangeably for their definitions of a spouse.) Mr. Justice Kent found:

[50] The evidence is overwhelming and I find as a fact that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved and cared deeply about each other, and that they had a loving and intimate relationship for over 20 years that was far more than mere friendship or even so-called "friendship with benefits". I accept Mr. Chambers' evidence that he would have liked to share a home with Ms. Connor after the separation from his wife, but was unable to do so because of Ms. Connor's hoarding illness. The evidence amply supports, and I find as a fact, that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved each other, were faithful to each other, communicated with each other almost every day when they were not together, considered themselves to be (and presented themselves to be) "husband and wife" and were accepted by all who knew them as a couple.

[64] Connor Estate may be distinguishable from this case because Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor were physically intimate for over 20 years, and presented themselves to the world as a married couple.

[65] Other decisions in which a marriage-like relationship has been found to exist despite the parties not living together have involved circumstances in which the couple lived under the same roof at previous points in the relationship, and the issue was whether they continued to be spouses after they took up separate residences: in Thompson v. Floyd, 2001 BCCA 78, the parties had lived together for a period of at least 11 years; in Roach v. Dutra, 2010 BCCA 264, the parties had lived together for approximately three years.

[66] However, as Mr. Justice Kent noted in Connor Estate:

[48] … [W]hile much guidance might be found in this case law, the simple fact is that no two cases are identical (and indeed they usually vary widely) and it is the assessment of evidence as a whole in this particular case which matters.

[67] Mr. Justice Kent concluded:

[53] Like human beings themselves, marriage-like relationships can come in many and various shapes. In this particular case, I have no doubt that such a relationship existed …

[68] As stated, Ms. Han’s claim is novel. It may even be weak. Almost all of the traditional factors are missing. The fact that Ms. Han and Mr. Dorje never lived under the same roof, never shared a bed and never even spent time together in person will militate against a finding they lived with one another in a marriage-like relationship. However, the traditional factors are not a mandatory check-list that confines the “elastic” concept of a marriage-like relationship. And if the COVID pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that real relationships can form, blossom and end in virtual worlds.

[69] In my view, the merits of Ms. Han’s claim should be decided on the evidence. Subject to an overriding prejudice to Mr. Dorje, she should have leave to amend the notice of family claim. However, she should also provide meaningful particulars of the alleged marriage-like relationship.

F. Delay / Prejudice
[70] Ms. Han filed her notice of family claim on July 17, 2019. She brought this application to amend approximately one year and nine months after she filed the pleading, just over two months before the original trial date.

[71] Ms. Han’s delay was made all that more remarkable by her change in position from January 19, 2021, when she confirmed, through counsel, that she was not seeking spousal support in this case.

[72] Ms. Han gave notice of her intention to proceed with this application to Mr. Dorje on March 16, 2021. By the time the application was heard, the parties had conducted examinations for discovery without covering the issues that would arise from a claim of spousal support.

[73] Also, in April, Ms. Han produced additional documents, primarily text messages, that may be relevant to her claim of spousal support, but were undecipherable to counsel for Mr. Dorje, who does not read Mandarin.

[74] This application proceeded largely on documents selected and translated by counsel for Ms. Han. I was informed that Mandarin translations of the full materials would take 150 days.

[75] Understandably in the circumstances, Mr. Dorje argued that an amendment two months before trial would be neither just nor convenient. He argued that he would be prejudiced by an adjournment so as to allow Ms. Han to advance a late claim of spousal support.

[76] The circumstances changed on May 6, 2021, when Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to July 2022 and reset it for 25 days. Madam Justice Walkem noted that most of the witnesses live internationally and require translators. She also noted that paternity may be in issue, and Mr. Dorje may amend his pleadings to raise that issue. It seems clear that, altogether apart from the potential spousal support claim, the parties were not ready to proceed to trial on June 7, 2021.

[77] In my view, any remaining prejudice to Mr. Dorje is outweighed by the importance of having all of the issues between the parties decided on their merits.

[78] Ms. Han’s delay and changes of position on spousal support may be a matter to de addressed in a future order of costs; but they are not grounds on which to deny her leave to amend the notice of family claim.

CONCLUSION
[79] Ms. Han is granted leave to amend her notice of family claim in the form attached as Appendix A to the notice of application to include a claim for spousal support.

[80] Within 21 days, or such other deadline as the parties may agree, Ms. Han must provide particulars of the marriage-like relationship alleged in the amended notice of family claim.

[81] Ms. Han is entitled to costs of this application in the cause of the spousal support claim.

“Master Elwood”

Before getting married we travelled quite a bit
Together we've been to Japan, England, Shanghai, Australia, Thailand, Singapore, Korea...
Mr Chan has also been to Canada, Spain, France, Germany, New Zealand, Indonesia...

We don't think we're going to be going anywhere in 2020… so let's drool over all the trips we've had
I kind of forgot that one trip that was so important back in 2015, that one trip to Australia, that one day trip to Sydney?!?!

00:00 Start
01:25 Sydney
01:59 Paris
02:10 Shanghai
04:47 Girls trip? Guys Trip?
06:02 Krabi
06:45 Bangkok

Sarah's Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/rahrahsong/

Jason's Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/chanjason_/

#Sydney #Paris #Shanghai
#GirlsTrip #GuysTrip
#Krabi #Bangkok
#BabyJamie #LoveAndFamily #DamonAndJamie
#SJ #DJ
#LookAfterYourFamily #LookAfterYourBaby
#LookAfterYourBabies (all 3 of them)
#StayHome
#StayCalm #StayPositive
#StaySafe #StayHealthy
#LookAfterYourself #LookAfterEachOther
#KeepUpTheHardWork
#SarahAndJason #SarahSong #JasonChan

First impression that I had when I read this news is that I could not believe that they committed such an old-fashioned crime I mean buying votes is old buying votes is such an old crime I mean these guys I mean this couple married couple they must be smart right these people must be smart and did they really think did they really think that they could get away with this I mean buying votes come on I mean someone's going to know I mean you have to pay somebody right so if this guy talks then you're screwed right I mean it might have worked it might have worked 50 years ago when there was no internet or social network but like modern society like today no no no no it's not going to work because it's so hard it's almost impossible to keep people quiet nowadays right so I was in a way disappointed I have 24 seconds I was kind of disappointed that you know smart people like these guys committed such an old-fashioned crime I guess they were desperate they must have been desperate to commit such an old-fashioned crime so you know what but you know right now they are only suspects you know you know that the crime has not been confirmed so let's just let's just wait I guess the trial will take a long time in a case like this it's going to take a while but let's just wait until the court decides the final decision the court makes a final decision.

少人数のスタディーグループをやっています。ビデオ通話でやっているので全国誰でも参加できます！
http://esi-gym.com/circle/

YouTubeライブ授業、勉強会などの告知はLINEでお知らせしています！
https://line.me/R/ti/p/%40wem5691r

お仕事のお問い合わせ
http://esi-gym.com/contact/

【さわけん】
英会話講師 / ビデオブロガー
2020年4月から東京都民（名古屋生まれ）
ロサンゼルス13年在住 / ラスベガス2年在住
ユニオンバンク（米国）に勤務経験
アメリカ人との結婚 / 離婚を経験する (T_T)
TOEICスコアは「L&R」「S&W」 ともに9割以上
英語発音テスト(EPT) 95点

【メディア実績】
中京テレビ PS三世 出演
名古屋テレビ UP! 出演
NHK 所さん！大変ですよ 取材協力

【SNS】
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/sawaken0708/

Twitter
https://twitter.com/sawaken_eng

Hello Youtube Fam,

Today’s Vlog:
New Intro,
Because You’re My Best Friend!
He Said WHAT?
He Still Falls For It,
This SUCKS!

In every single vlog since we welcomed Ayla into our lives, we get comments asking whether there will be a new intro. Honestly, we just never truly had a chance and even still, felt like there was a lot of pressure so we probably procrastinated a bit too. I hope you guys enjoy our new temporary intro. It's a combination of our previous and very first intro =)

Not going to lie, my hands have been very full since Tim left to HK. He will be away for the next 2 weeks or so. For now, I will be using any time to myself to get any rest I can hehe. It's 7.23pm and I am so ready to go to bed.

Love you guys!!

The Bubz family xo


Subscribe to my Vlog channel for daily doses of HAPPINESS!
http://bit.ly/BubzVlogz

Subscribe to my Beauty Channel here:
http://bit.ly/BubzBeauty

Connect with me:
MY WEBSITE: http://www.bubzbeauty.com
TWITTER: http://www.twitter.com/bubzbeauty
INSTAGRAM: http://www.instagram.com/itsbubz
TIM'S INSTAGRAM: http://www.instagram.com/bubzhubz
FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/itsbubz
ADD ME ON SNAPCHAT: “THEREALBUBZ”
BUY MY EYESHADOW PALETTE HERE: http://bit.ly/BUBZpalette
BUY MY BOOK available in Barnes & Noble (they ship internationally): http://bit.ly/2nnSYtU
E-BOOK VERSION available on Amazon: http://bit.ly/BubzEguide