關於 clothing word ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

Remember God After You Have Prospered

“You shall observe to do all the commandments which I command you today, that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which Yahweh swore to your fathers. You shall remember all the way which Yahweh your God has led you these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble you, to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments, or not. He humbled you, and allowed you to be hungry, and fed you with manna, which you didn’t know, neither did your fathers know; that he might teach you that man does not live by bread only, but man lives by every word that proceeds out of Yahweh’s mouth. Your clothing didn’t grow old on you, neither did your foot swell, these forty years. You shall consider in your heart that as a man disciplines his son, so Yahweh your God disciplines you. You shall keep the commandments of Yahweh your God, to walk in his ways, and to fear him. For Yahweh your God brings you into a good land, a land of brooks of water, of springs, and underground water flowing into valleys and hills; a land of wheat and barley, and vines and fig trees and pomegranates; a land of olive trees and honey; a land in which you shall eat bread without scarceness, you shall not lack anything in it; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills you may dig copper. You shall eat and be full, and you shall bless Yahweh your God for the good land which he has given you. Beware lest you forget Yahweh your God, in not keeping his commandments, and his ordinances, and his statutes, which I command you today; lest, when you have eaten and are full, and have built fine houses, and lived in them; and when your herds and your flocks multiply, and your silver and your gold is multiplied, and all that you have is multiplied; then your heart might be lifted up, and you forget Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage; who led you through the great and terrible wilderness, with venomous snakes and scorpions, and thirsty ground where there was no water; who poured water for you out of the rock of flint; who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers didn’t know; that he might humble you, and that he might prove you, to do you good at your latter end: and lest you say in your heart, “My power and the might of my hand has gotten me this wealth.” But you shall remember Yahweh your God, for it is he who gives you power to get wealth; that he may establish his covenant which he swore to your fathers, as it is today.” (Deuteronomy 8:1-18 WEB)

The Lord gave me a word “scorpions” which led me to this passage.

I sense that a lot of us here have been through a long wilderness journey where we have been asking God “How long more,” and we are already close to entering our promised land.

As we are about to enjoy His marvelous restoration and multiplication of provision in our lives, in whatever way He has been leading you, REMEMBER HIM when you go into the land flowing with milk and honey.

Don’t forget all the precious lessons about humility and faith that you learned while in the dry wilderness.

Money can be destructive because the sinful flesh is tempted to make money its idol.

Keep your eyes on Jesus…

There is a reason why things take time. The preparation phase is needed so that you would be able to handle the sudden multiplication.

Despite all the tough times, God has always been faithful to you, and you are still alive. Give thanks to Him!

Under the New Covenant of Grace, to keep God’s commandments means to believe in Jesus Christ and to love one another as Christ has loved us. Will you allow yourself to continue being led by the Spirit to walk in love, even after you have prospered?

I say again, REMEMBER HIM. Okay, now go and possess your promised land. The Lord shall go before you, and you will approach it one step at a time with each passing day!

Are you enjoying my content? I am having a flash 40% off sale for “The Everything Bundle” that contains all my eBooks. It will only last for 2 days!

Here's a list of what you will receive when you get this bundle:

* All My Sermon Notes ebooks (2014 - 2020, so 7 eBooks in total)
* Understand the Four Gospels Through the Lens of Grace (4 ebooks set)
* Sandcastles Don't Last Forever ebook
* Messiah's Miracles: The Power of Having Faith in Jesus Christ ebook
* A Tour of Heaven and Eternity ebook
* Beautiful, Healthy and Strong Like Jesus ebook
* How to Fast Under Grace ebook
* How to Receive Health and Healing From the Tree of Life ebook
* The Book of Revelation Explained ebook
* The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ebook
* God's Appointed Time: How to Be Fruitful in Every Season of Life ebook
* Silencing the Serpent: How Christians Can Be Victorious in Spiritual Warfare ebook
* Younger and Younger: 31 Days of God's Youth Renewal Promises ebook
* All Things Made New: How to Prosper in All Things Through God's Restoration ebook
* 6 months access to the God Every Morning (GEM) devotionals archive with more than 600 devotionals at the moment.

You can also read the customer reviews at the bottom of the product page. Get “The Everything Bundle” here: https://bit.ly/-everything-bundle

Prospered after the Night of Lockdown

I shared this post back in April this year, but I am led to share it again, with new details. Read carefully and prayerfully!

“You shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two door posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning. For Yahweh will pass through to strike the Egyptians; and when he sees the blood on the lintel, and on the two door posts, Yahweh will pass over the door, and will not allow the destroyer to come in to your houses to strike you.” (Exodus‬ ‭12:22-23‬ ‭WEB‬‬)

In Egypt, the children of Israel were commanded by Yahweh God to be on lockdown in their homes to take shelter from a final plague. Sounds familiar?

It wasn’t the front door that protected them from the last plague, but the blood of the Passover lamb applied on the doorpost and lintel, forming a Hebrew letter “Tav” which represents a cross.

When the destroyer swept through the land of Egypt, the firstborn children and animals of the Egyptians died, but the children of Israel were unharmed because of the blood.

Dear brethren, be wise, stay at home in this season, but without fear.

The bunch of hyssop which the children of Israel used to apply the blood of the lamb is a picture of our tongue.

When we believe and declare that by the shed blood of Jesus we are under God’s protection from plagues and pestilences, we will experience it.

Protection won’t happen by default. You have to apply the blood on your heart’s door, and it will happen through faith.

Do you know what happened after the plague had passed? The children of Israel were chased out from Egypt in a hurry because the Egyptians were fearful of them.

“The Egyptians were urgent with the people, to send them out of the land in haste, for they said, “We are all dead men.” The people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneading troughs being bound up in their clothes on their shoulders. The children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they asked of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and clothing. Yahweh gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they let them have what they asked. They plundered the Egyptians.” (Exodus‬ ‭12:33-36‬ ‭WEB‬)

They plundered the Egyptians and came out of Egypt with silver and gold. After having no salary for hundreds of years, they were repaid and restored suddenly in just one night!

Later on, the children of Israel used the gold to build the tabernacle to worship God.

Speaking prophetically about our times, after the COVID-19 lockdown, the wealth of the Egyptians (the world; Gentiles) will be transferred into the hands of God’s covenant people (the church of Jesus Christ).

For the world, it’s a recession, but God’s children will see the wealth of the nations added unto them.

This is for those who have faith—remember that anyone of the children of Israel who didn’t apply the blood of the lamb on their doorposts and lintel ended up with a dead firstborn child.

God gave favor to the children of Israel so that the Egyptians gave the children of Israel “what they asked”.
If you don’t ask, you will walk out of this pandemic with no increase.

Those who have a revelation of this will ask boldly and receive in abundance.
How much will you ask for when you know that the answer will always be “Yes” and “Okay”?
Personally, I’d take as much as I can on my way out of Egypt, loading them on carts and wagons with animals pulling them.

This financial enrichment will happen by God granting us favor. We will be prospered for a purpose.

Just like the children of Israel used the silver and gold to build a place of worship unto God, we will be enriched so that the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be sponsored to go further and fastest than ever before.

Don’t be one of those who say they don’t need to prosper or that it’s not God’s will to prosper His people. Forgive me for being so blunt, but that’s self-centered, unbiblical and lazy thinking.

This is not about you. It’s about the growth of God’s kingdom. Receive in abundance for Jesus’ sake, and give all the extra money away to fund evangelism efforts if you don’t need it—the increase in wealth is not for your own hoarding purposes.
Use your wealth to be a blessing to others and show God’s heart of love.

“Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt. There will arise after them seven years of famine, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt. The famine will consume the land, and the plenty will not be known in the land by reason of that famine which follows; for it will be very grievous. The dream was doubled to Pharaoh, because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.” (Genesis‬ ‭41:29-32‬ ‭WEB‬‬)

Either last year or the year before, as I was studying the Book of Genesis, the Holy Spirit opened my understanding to see the prophetic meaning of the passage above.

It is about Pharaoh’s dream. In the end times, the seven years of plenty represent the seven years before the Rapture, and the seven years of famine afterwards represents the seven years of Tribulation for the world. Before the Lord returns, it will be a time of great prosperity and blessedness that ends upon the church’s departure from this world.

God’s kingdom is going to expand at an unprecedented speed! Are you ready for a great outpouring of God’s blessings before Jesus returns to receive His church? Make sure you position yourself to receive in abundance!

I believe God showed me a clear sign to confirm what I knew inside—the financial vehicle by which this wealth transfer will happen, besides physical gold and silver (which are always good to have).

Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor and this is not financial advice, so do your own research before making any decisions with your resources. I need to share this and not selfishly keep this knowledge to myself. That being said, you can see the details of the sign on my tweet: https://twitter.com/miltongohblog/status/1405652799258390529?s=21

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”

As a Lolita-fashioned girl for 14 years, Melody Fang was first attracted to the subculture because of the 2004 Japanese film “Kamikaze Girls” when she was 14 years old. Now in her 20s, Melody still finds Lolita fashion a lifestyle of elegance and confidence.

The term “Lolita” is first derived from Vladimir Nabokov’s 1955 novel about a middle-aged man’s obsession with a 12-year-old girl named Lolita. When the word took root in Japan in the 80s, it was turned into alternative street-fashion highly influenced by clothing and aesthetics from the Victorian and Rococo periods.

https://hk.appledaily.com/feature/20210516/IE563XM7GJERHOXWLJTSY252WI/

影片:
【我是南丫島人】23歲仔獲cafe免費借位擺一人咖啡檔 $6,000租住350呎村屋：愛這裏互助關係 (果籽 Apple Daily) (https://youtu.be/XSugNPyaXFQ)
【香港蠔 足本版】流浮山白蠔收成要等三年半 天然生曬肥美金蠔日產僅50斤 即撈即食中環名人坊蜜餞金蠔 西貢六福酥炸生蠔 (果籽 Apple Daily) (https://youtu.be/Fw653R1aQ6s)
【這夜給惡人基一封信】大佬茅躉華日夜思念 回憶從8歲開始：兄弟有今生沒來世 (壹週刊 Next) (https://youtu.be/t06qjQbRIpY)
【太子餃子店】新移民唔怕蝕底自薦包餃子 粗重功夫一腳踢 老闆刮目相看邀開店：呢個女人唔係女人(飲食男女 Apple Daily) https://youtu.be/7CUTg7LXQ4M)
【娛樂人物】情願市民留家唔好出街聚餐 鄧一君兩麵舖執笠蝕200萬 (蘋果日報 Apple Daily) (https://youtu.be/e3agbTOdfoY)

果籽 ：http://as.appledaily.com
籽想旅行：http://travelseed.hk
健康蘋台： http://applehealth.com.hk
動物蘋台： http://applepetform.com

#果籽 #StayHome #WithMe #跟我一樣 #宅在家

?FOLLOW US?
Sue's IG: https://www.instagram.com/cheongsueann
Jo's IG: https://www.instagram.com/joannwithadash

Hey guys,
It seems like it took us forever to edit this vlog. But we hope we are not too late~ First, we would like to thank you guys for all the bday wishes. You guys made our day even more special and warmer ?? We hope that we can continue to celebrate more bdays with you guys ???

We realised we only have 5000-word limitation here so we couldn't answer everyone. Sorry guys~ We'll probably answer them in our other vlogs.

Lots of love,
Jo & Sue

?IG QUESTIONS?
? What kind of app you use to edit your insta stories?
Sue: Inshot app. Cinema 02 filter + grains OR I use SNOW app
Jo: VSCO. M5 filter, M5 +2.8, Exposure +0.4, Contrast +0.5, Sharpen +4.1, White Balance : Temperature -0.9, Tint +1.2, Vignette +8.0, Grain +4.0

? How to you manage alone time?
We both have our own routine & we respect each other space. We actually spend most of our time alone~ Just in the vlog it seems like we are together 24/7

? If all expenses paid and no pain at all, what kind of plastic surgery would you girls do?
Love this question! We do get sponsorship offer for plastic surgery and we have kinda high tolerance for pain but we still rejected the offer =) We don’t think we would change a thing~ It’s not that we are happy with everything that we’re born with just that we think we rather learn to love what we are given. That being said, we are not against plastic surgery either.

? With your current income, do you guys be able to make a living on your own?
We survived. LOL~ It’s not a lot but we love what we do and we’ll continue to work hard.

? What happens if you are over 35 and have not married yet?
Good question~ We don’t think it should be an issue. Married or not, it won't change a thing =)

? Is there any tips or book recommended to start reading?
We all have different book preferences. When people say they are not a reader we always think that they have not found the right book. It’s not you, it’s the book LOL So keep searching and keep reading. Don’t feel bad to leave a book if you don’t like it~

? What if one day you two fall in love with the same guy?
It’s not going to happen~ We both have different taste in guys

? If you were to focus on one thing you can improve on, what would it be?
Sue: I would like to improve my sleeping habit. I need to sleep early.
Jo: For work, I want to improve my Photoshop skill. For personal, I want to overcome my fear of crowds.

? What is something which gives you happiness recently?
Jo: Baking cakes & learning crochet
Sue: Exercising & Baking breads

? Places / Country you guys want to travel when C19 ends or safe to travel again?
Jo: Korea
Sue: Taiwan~ Since we’re learning Mandarin, I think Taiwan is the great to practice my Mandarin. Plus, I like Taiwan.

? What’s your preference in guys?
Jo: I like hardworking guys. And also someone who knows how to enjoy life alone and with people too.
Sue: I like animated guys… I’ll leave it as that. LOL

? What made you start your own business? How to solve it when no customer buy?
We started our first business as a side thing. We just love clothings and we thought selling clothing would be fun. When we closed our clothing business down, opening another business seems like a familiar thing to do~
& how to get more customers? You can pay for ads. Get influencers to promote your business. Get family and friends to spread the news.

? Do you guys inspire each other? Who inspire who the most?
We both have different style so we get inspirations from outside sources ( like on Pinterest, YouTube or Instagram)

? How tall are you guys? Both of you look so tall.
We get that a lot. But we are tiny~ 157cm =)

?What’s the cutest thing someone did for you?
Jo: The cutest thing is when a perfect stranger gave me an extra rose because he saw my then bf only gave me one stalk of rose. lol
Sue: When my mum bought us balloons on our birthday

? Advice to those who are entering into their 20s?
Jo: If you just entering your 20s, Welcome to adulthood~
My advice … Live & Be happy. Do what you love. Learn about yourself as much as you can. Learn new things. Try new things. and use SPF HAHA!

Sue: This is an exciting time. Like what Jo said, "Learn about yourself as much as you can". It's the time you get to choose what you want to do, what you want to be and be sure to choose wisely who you surround yourself with. .
? MUSIC ?
Music by frumhere, kevatta - a lover's wishlist - https://thmatc.co/?l=5720AA49
Music by VALNTN - Mona Lisa - https://thmatc.co/?l=A9A8AAFB
Music by Syphax - Rose Lips - https://thmatc.co/?l=17A29243
Music by ninjoi. - Nishi - https://thmatc.co/?l=131DB05E
Music by Gil Wanders - Lost / Found - https://thmatc.co/?l=297B0B22
Music by Chinsaku - Blossom - https://thmatc.co/?l=682C114
Music by frumhere, kevatta - warm feeling - https://thmatc.co/?l=6E20961C
Music by eSNa - Playboy - https://thmatc.co/?l=82495F87

#獻給各領域創作者的影像詩篇

「自然想到爬山的意象，那有人生的味道，傳達著『捨得』，在路上，我們自願或非自願地捨棄了什麼，但同時我們也會得到什麼，於是我們繼續前行。」—— 導演 丁冠濠 / 42nd金穗獎 學生組最佳劇情片

約好了
不放棄，不斷前行。

誰說過程中的失去，不是一種獲得？

儘管終點尚未明朗
是夥伴的同行，讓我們能用自己想要的節奏與模樣
勇敢踏下每一步。

#金穗獎 #麋先生 #愚公移山

【42nd金穗獎 學生組首獎 - 詹博鈞導演 作品】
https://youtu.be/UmT1qlxS1Es
【42nd金穗獎 學生組最佳導演獎 - 陳亮廷導演 作品】 https://youtu.be/iNYjk5nj_EA
【42nd金穗獎 學生組最佳劇情片獎 - 丁冠濠導演 作品】https://youtu.be/mZxA0zHfobg


【愚公移山 On The Road】

從前又從前
為何故事和寓言都得從那麼久前
重點都放在後面
一樣勸世的大道理卻倒是百聽不厭
愚公移山的章節
也都教過你山得慢慢地慢慢地推
慢慢把未來的志願
從一支筆變六根弦

像片小小的落葉飄在風間
向那些字裡行間問去哪邊
書裡的風景你就好好欣賞
隨意晃晃 但下一頁的故事得你說

坐在音箱上的老菸槍
帶點風霜 留點鬍渣
那片落葉問他要去哪
他叼著煙 淡淡地講
「小伙子你要記得從沒什麼最高的地方
我還在路上 還熱淚盈眶」

喂喂喂
爸媽老師都教過你路要怎麼走
像愚公 別掉頭 也別好吃懶做
吧啦吧啦吧啦
書本裡講的大道理誰沒有聽過
像落葉 得出走 帶這些故事走

落葉飄呀飄呀離開老地方
風也只能帶著它而它決定落下
愚公其實還在那個老地方
他說最高的地方是你決定停下


｜影像製作｜
演員 cast / 羅婷 Miku，劉庭妤 Liu Ting Yu，張嘉恩 Anan Chang，荷桃 hetao，劉敬 jim liu
製片 Producer / 許毓芳 HSU YU FANG
製片助理 Production Assistant / 高翔宇 Bean
導演 Director / 丁冠濠 TENG KUN HOU
場記 Script Supervisor / 宋祉葳 Sung Chih Wei
攝影師 D.P / 詹子徹 Chan Tzu Che
攝大助 Photography Assistant / 蔡岳峰 York Tsai
攝二助 Photography Assistant / 宋文皓 Wen Hao Sung
服裝 Costume Designer / 陳冠臻 J
服裝助理 Clothing assistant / 黃浩旻 Min
美術 Art / 宋祉葳 Sung Chih Wei
側拍 Still Photographer / 戴晏甄 DAI YEN ZHEN
剪接 Editor / 丁冠濠 TENG KUN HOU
調光 Colorist / 萬芷瑋 Abby Wan
字卡設計 Word card designer / 劉政瑋 Cheng-Wei Liu
感謝 Thanks to / 黃彥綺 Oceanne Huang

同場加映：最佳劇情片獎作品《合十》限時播放 https://youtu.be/3JzjsghZP7I


｜音樂製作｜
製作人 Producer / 錢煒安 Zen Chien
配唱製作人 Vocal Producer / 陳又齊 Gyniuz Chen
詞 Lyricist / 吳聖皓
曲 Composer / 吳聖皓
編曲 Arrangement / 麋先生 MIXER
打擊樂器 Percussion / 錢煒安 Zen Chien
鼓技師 Drum Technician / 余燦宇 Yu Tsan Yu
錄音工程師 Recording Engineer / 錢煒安 Zen Chien, 陳祺龍 Chris Chen, 林喆安 Z-An Lin, 小B Bosy
錄音室 Recording Studio / 112F Recording Studio, 麋舍 Misir Studio
混音工程師 Mixing Engineer / 錢煒安 Zen Chien
混音錄音室 Mixing Studio / 112F Recording Studio
母帶製作工程師 Mastering Engineer / 錢煒安 Zen Chien
母帶製作錄音室 Mastering Studio / 112F Recording Studio
特別感謝 / 黃振頡 Jen Jie Huang、iNPUT音鋪-狗狗


‥‥‥麋先生官方・Mixer Official‥‥‥
facebook https://fb.com/MixerMiSir
YouTube https://www.youtube.com/MixerMisir
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/mixerband_official/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mixermisir
Weibo http://m.tw.weibo.com/3739854504