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”
同時也有3部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過23萬的網紅Hey It's Dena,也在其Youtube影片中提到,✧ Listen to “July” HERE 來聽歌 Youtube MV: https://youtu.be/sEJypi8BIls Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/u83d2ckk KKBOX: https://tinyurl.com/3sr2bd76 iTun...
「nothing written台灣」的推薦目錄:
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 江魔的魔界(Kong Keen Yung 江健勇) Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 彭文正 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 Marz23 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 Hey It's Dena Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 Hey It's Dena Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於nothing written台灣 在 transitionofficial Youtube 的最佳貼文
nothing written台灣 在 彭文正 Facebook 的最佳貼文
轉載Chenchen Chen fb
🛠《大家來找碴welcome strict proofreader 》
看到Christopher Chen附在獨立觀察的連結,披露日本記者黑木亮著手調查東京知事小池百合子的埃及開羅大學學歴史,所以整理了文章一半的中英對照如下,另外一半預期周末整理好再另外貼新版。
大家可以比較東京知事和她的大貴人(埃及前副首相Dr Hatem)如何促使她主張她1976年確從埃及開羅大學畢業的做法。台灣媒體不敢報導此日本疑似假學歷的新聞,倒是刷了很多東京知事抗疫好棒棒的中文報導-想必是要洗嬰粉的腦「會做事就好了,學歷有什麼重要」哈哈😄⋯⋯
✳️原文連結: https://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/60643
🔥偽造大學學位的指控困擾東京都知事小池百合子(Vol.4)
Allegations of fake university degree haunt Tokyo Governor Yuriko Koike (vol.4)
💥自從現任東京都知事小池百合子(Yuriko Koike)於1992年成為國會議員以來,一直有謠言流傳稱,小池百合子(Koike)文飾美化她的學歷。
Ever since the incumbent Governor of Tokyo, Yuriko Koike became a Member of Parliament in 1992, rumors have been circulating that Koike embellished her academic credentials.
小池聲稱自己曾自開羅大學畢業,但是如果以阿拉伯語為母語的人去聽她的阿拉伯語,那麼她公開身為開羅大學畢業生的學歷,似乎就顯得更加可疑了。
Koike claims to have graduated from Cairo University but if an Arabic speaker listens to her Arabic, her published academic credentials as a Cairo University graduate seems more than dubious.
[我有]強有力的證據可以證明她偽造學歷,例如由室友提供的證詞-有紀錄片可查的證詞;小池的自相矛盾的說法表明,儘管第一年不及格,她仍然在四年之內畢業,她的初階程度阿拉伯語,以及關於畢業論文的謊言,和她拒絕向東京都議會提交畢業文件的頑強行為。
There are strong evidence about her fake academic credentials such as testimony by the flatmate supported by documentary evidence, Koike's self-contradictory statement in her book to have graduated in four years despite failing her first year, her rudimentary Arabic, her lie about the graduation thesis and her stubbornness in refusing to submit her graduation documents to the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly.
身為一個通曉阿拉伯語並從埃及大學(開羅美國大學的中東研究專業)畢業的人,我自有一種任務感,因此我決定對這些指控進行調查。 經過兩年的調查,我找不到任何證據,甚至沒有一絲一毫的最低線索,可以證明小池是從開羅大學畢業的。
Feeling a sense of duty as someone who learnt Arabic and graduated from an Egyptian university (MA, Middle East Studies from the American University in Cairo), I decided to investigate the allegations. After two years of investigation, I could not find any evidence, nor even the slightest hint that Koike graduated from Cairo University.
在這個共由六大部組成的文章中,我詳細介紹了我的調查結果。這裡是第四部的內容:
In this six-part article, I present the results of my investigation in detail.Here is the fourth part of it;
💥小池有符合[埃及大學]轉學資格嗎?
Was Koike eligible to transfer?
"小池在她的書中和其他地方聲稱,她於1972年10月開學以一年級(新鮮人)生身分進入開羅大學。
Koike claims in her books and other places that she entered Cairo University as a first year student (freshman) in October 1972.
但是,她室友在"假簡歷”紀錄片中說:“小池是於1973年10月以二年級學生身分進入開羅大學。
However, in the ""Fake CV"" the flatmate says, ""Koike entered Cairo University in October 1973 as a second year student.
「小池高興地對我說:“我父親先請當時的哈特姆博士,當時也是埃及副首相,還兼任文化和信息部長,依據我在關西學院大學-是一間日本兵庫縣的私立大學-所上課的幾個月[學程],加上另外在開羅美國大學的上語言課程的幾個月,一起調整合併當成是我在開羅大學就讀的第一學年[學程時間]。」
Koike happily told me ‘My father asked Dr. Hatem, then Egypt's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Culture and Information, to swap my few months at Kwansei Gakuin University, a private university in Hyogo prefecture, and a few months at the language course at the American University in Cairo for the first year at Cairo University. ‘
「哈特姆博士接受了這一要求。此外,我的學雜費和申請費全免除了。 」
‘Dr. Hatem accepted the request. In addition, my tuition and admission fees have been waived’ .
這顯然是寫在室友1972年11月19日給她在日本母親的信中的。根據“假簡歷”該部分陳述的內容,她(室友)大部分信都附有信件日期和郵戳。 如果是這樣,他們這些人都將會被埃及法院起訴。
This is apparently written in the flatmate’s letter to her mother in Japan dated 19 November 1972. According to the ""Fake CV"" most of her letters were dated and postmarked. If so, they will be admissible to court."
呈現在“假簡歷”的內容中,含當時也正在埃及另一所大學就讀的另一名日本女性,她說,她對小池當時可以轉入開羅大學二年級就讀感到驚訝。 我(作者:黑木亮)所採訪過的另一位開羅大學的日本畢業生也記得:小池當年是[直接]轉入開羅大學二年級。
In the ""Fake CV"" another Japanese woman who was attending another university in Egypt at the time says she was surprised that Koike had transferred in the second year at Cairo University. Another Japanese graduate of Cairo University whom I interviewed also remembered that Koike had transferred to the second year."
然而,轉學到包括開羅大學在內的埃及國立大學訂有嚴格的規定。為了進行轉學,學生必須在另一所大學獲得與埃及國立大學課程相同或相似的內容和學習時數的學分,並且必須獲得一定程度的成績。 開羅大學轉學中心辦公室向我證實了這一點。
However, strict rules are in place to transfer to Egypt's state universities, including Cairo University. In order to transfer, a student must have earned credits at another university with the same or similar content and number of hours as the Egyptian state university’s curriculum and must have earned a certain number of grades. This was confirmed to me by the Central Transfers Office of Cairo University.
例如,在2016-17學年,如果學生希望:
-轉學到工程或醫學學院,則必須從其他大學獲得至少imtiyaaz(優秀)成績。
-轉學實務研究學院,則必須從其他大學獲得至少jaiid jiddab(非常好)的成績。
-轉學理論學習研究學院,則必須從其他大學獲得至少jaiid (好)的成績。
In the case of the 2016-17 academic year, for example, students are required to have at least imtiyaaz (excellent) grade from other university if the student wishes to transfer to the Faculty of Engineering or Medicine and at least jaiid jiddan (very good) grade in the case of faculties of practical study and at least jaiid (good) grade for those of theoretical study.
前面如曾經提到的記者,達莉亞·施貝爾(Dalia Shibel)這樣告訴我:“在埃及,國立大學和私立大學是兩個完全不同的系統。即使您在開羅的美國大學學習了10年並獲得了必要的學分,您還是必須從開羅(國立)大學的一年級學生重新開始。這是我國的法律”。 因此,像小池這樣沒有在另一所大學讀完一年(也沒有獲得任何學分)的人是完全不可能被核准轉學的。
The aforementioned journalist Dalia Shibel told me that ""In Egypt state universities and private universities are two completely different systems. Even if you study at the American University in Cairo for 10 years obtaining necessary credits, you have to start as a first year student in Cairo University. This is the law of our country"". Therefore it is totally impossible that a person like Koike who has not finished a year at another university (and has not earned any credits) would be allowed to transfer."
小池最多只在關西學院大學學習了幾個月。 她在開羅的美國大學CASA那裡學習阿拉伯語只是一所語言學校,不提供任何學分或學位。 如果像一些日本人指出的那樣,小池真果真是在1973年轉入開羅大學第二年級的話,那不過是欺詐性的轉學而已。 這意味著她從一開始就沒有資格畢業。
Koike only attended Kwansei Gakuin University for several months at most. CASA at the American University in Cairo where she learnt Arabic is just a language school and does not offer any credits or degrees. If, as some Japanese people point out, Koike actually transferred to the second year at Cairo University in 1973, that is nothing but a fraudulent transfer. That means she was not eligible for graduation from the beginning.
💥關於小池入學許可的問題並沒有得到答案
No answer to the question about Koike’s admittance
2019年,有51人因以慈善機構樂捐名義為幌子,賄賂美國一個組織而受到起訴,該組織通過提升名人和其他人的孩子的SAT(大學才能測驗)分數,以欺詐手段允許他們的子女因此能夠進入著名的大學。
In 2019, 51 people were prosecuted in the United States for paying bribes under the guise of charity to an organization that allows celebrities and others to increase their children's SAT (college aptitude test) scores and fraudulently admit them to prestigious universities.
其中一位女演員費利西蒂·霍夫曼(Felicity Huffman)曾出演電視劇《欲望師奶(台灣翻譯)》,被判處14天監禁,並於去年10月在加利福尼亞州的女性監獄中被監禁。 霍夫曼的女兒索菲亞(Sophia)尚未上大學,據報導他將重考SAT。
One of them, actress Felicity Huffman, who starred in the TV drama Desperate Housewives, was sentenced to 14 days in prison and was incarcerated last October in a women's prison in California. Huffman's daughter Sophia has not enrolled in college and is reported to be retaking the SAT.
斯坦福大學以’非合法入學申請’為由,開除一名中國學生,原因在於他的父母為了可以濫用體育贊助(入學)名額,使他得以註冊該校學習課程,向該(同一)組織支付了650萬美元。
Stanford University expelled a Chinese student, whose parents paid $6.5 million to the organization for misusing a sports endorsement slot to enroll in the program, citing irregularities in submissions.
由於小池似乎未達到轉學入埃及國立大學的要求,因此我致信小池,詢問小池是在1972年還是1973年被錄取,但未得到任何答复(有關我詢問的信件內容,以及小池回應的所有完整文件,將在此報告的稍後部分中顯示)。
As Koike does not appear to have fulfilled the requirements for transferring to a state university in Egypt, I sent a letter to Koike, to ask whether she was admitted in 1972 or 1973 but received no response (the full text of my questions to and response from Koike will appear later in this report).
開羅大學是阿拉伯世界著名的大學之一,醫學,工程學,經濟和政治學係有許多優秀的埃及學生。 但是,該校在全球地位並不是很高。
Cairo University is one of the prominent universities in the Arab world and there are many excellent Egyptian students in the Faculties of Medicine, Engineering, and Economics and Political Science. However, its global standing is not very high.
在英國Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd.發布的2020年QS世界大學排名中,開羅大學在全球排名521-530,在埃及排名第二,與日本的熊本大學和長崎大學相當。 埃及最好的大學是開羅的美國大學(私立和美國認可大學),在世界上排名第395(與日本神戶大學並列)。 埃及排名第三的是艾因沙姆斯大學,亞歷山大大學和阿修特大學(所有國立大學),在世界範圍內排名第801-1000。
In the 2020 edition of the QS World University Rankings published by Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd. in the United Kingdom, Cairo University ranks 521-530 in the world and second in Egypt, on par with Kumamoto University and Nagasaki University in Japan. The best university in Egypt is the American University in Cairo (private and American-accredit university) which ranks 395th in the world (tied with Kobe University in Japan). Third place in Egypt are Ain Shams University, Alexandria University, and Assiut University (all state universities) which rank 801-1000th in the world.
💥小池與Abdel-Kader Hatem博士的關係
Koike’s Connections with Dr. Abdel-Kader Hatem
協助小池進行了“可能是欺詐性轉學"的埃及政客的名字出現在“假經歷”這部分的內容中。 這個室友證明,小池在1973年通過著名的埃及政治家阿卜杜勒·卡德爾·哈特姆博士的關係轉入開羅大學二年級。
The name of an Egyptian politician who assisted Koike's possible ""fraudulent transfer"" appears in the ""Fake CV"". The flatmate testifies that Koike transferred to the second grade at Cairo University in 1973 through the connections of Dr. Abdel- Kader Hatem, a prominent Egyptian politician."
Hatem於1917年生於亞歷山大。他畢業於軍事學院和開羅大學。 他參與了1952年的埃及革命(是一個推翻君主制的政變,次年埃及共和國成立),當時他是在由Gamal Abdel Nasser中校領導的自由軍運動中的一名年輕成員。
Hatem was born in Alexandria in 1917. A graduate of the Military Academy and Cairo University. He participated in the Egyptian revolution in 1952 (a coup to overthrow the monarchy which was followed by the foundation of the republic the following year) as a young member of the Free Officers Movement led by then Lieutenant Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser.
他於1957年成為國民議會議員,總統府副部長,1959年廣播電視國務部長,1962年文化部長,國家指導和旅遊部長,1971年副首相兼文化信息部長 ,曾任全國專業委員會常務理事兼埃及-日本友好協會主席。 他於2015年去世,享年97歲。
He became a member of the National Assembly in 1957, Deputy Minister in the Presidential Office, Minister of State for Radio and Television in 1959, Minister of Culture and Minister of National Guidance and Tourism in 1962, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Culture and Information in 1971, then longtime General Supervisor of the Specialized National Councils and President of the Egyptian-Japanese Friendship Association. He died in 2015 at the age of 97.
1974年2月,當時掌控文化和信息的副首相,哈特姆,以正式外賓的身份訪問了日本,並會見了日本首相田中角榮,副首相三木武夫,並參觀了皇宮與天皇會面。 1982年,他被日本政府授予"旭日東昇頭等大勳章”。
In February 1974, Hatem, who was then the Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Culture and Information visited Japan as an official guest and met Japan’s Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka, Deputy Prime Minister Takeo Miki and visited the Imperial Palace to meet the Emperor. In 1982 he was awarded the Grand Cordon of the Order of the Rising Sun, First Class by the Japanese government.
"在1974年Hatem訪日之際,日本駐埃及大使Tsutomu Wada在1974年2月12日給日本外交大臣的正式電報中寫道:“埃及政治的最新發展,哈特姆副首相的職位(曾擔任首相的代理者)得到了進一步鞏固,正如我經常報導的那樣,埃及副首相在6名媒體記者的陪同下訪問日本,這是非同尋常的,這清楚地表明了哈特姆博士的權力,並表明了他認為這次訪問的重要性。”
On the occasion of Hatem's visit to Japan in 1974 the Japanese Ambassador to Egypt Tsutomu Wada wrote in an official telegram dated 12 February 1974 to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan ""As a result of recent developments in Egyptian politics the position of Deputy Prime Minister Hatem (who had been acting as a substitute for the Prime Minister) has been further strengthened as I have often reported. It is remarkable for an Egyptian Deputy Prime Minister to visit Japan accompanied by 6 media reporters and that clearly shows Dr. Hatem’s power. It also shows how important he thinks this visit is."""
"哈特姆的阿拉伯文傳記《阿卜杜勒·卡德·哈特姆日記-十月戰爭政府首腦》於2016年在開羅出版(由埃及記者易卜拉欣·阿卜杜勒·阿齊茲撰寫)指出,哈特姆與中曾根康弘保持著良好的關係, 自1954年起擔任日本前首相,中曾根將當時的在校學生,小池百合子-他朋友的女兒,介紹給哈特姆,哈特姆照顧小池,小池稱哈特姆為教父,並給了小池零用錢, 每月14埃及鎊。(小池在《長袖和服的金字塔攀登》第250頁上寫道,她每月從埃及政府獲得12英鎊的獎學金)。
🌐Chenchen註:Furisode是日本年輕未婚女性穿著的最正式的和服風格-以長袖為其特色,小池應是以Furisode做為自己的意象代名詞,唯美的描繪她以一介日本年輕嬌嬌女,如何在陌生的中東環境-埃及地,逐步攀登權力金字塔。中東地區非常保守,不但男尊女卑,金字塔也不容許遊客任意攀登,更何況是穿著舉步維艱的長袖正式和服,所以小池以一個浮誇的畫面來增飾自己在埃及留學生活的映象。
The Arabic-language biography of Hatem “The Diary of Abdel-Kader Hatem - Head of the October War Government"" published in Cairo in 2016 (written by an Egyptian journalist Ibrahim Abdel Aziz) states that Hatem had been on good terms with Yasuhiro Nakasone, former Prime Minister of Japan, since 1954 and that Nakasone introduced Yuriko Koike to him, a student at that time, as the daughter of his friend. Hatem took care of Koike. Koike called Hatem a god-father, and he gave Koike an allowance of 14 Egyptian pounds a month (Koike wrote on page 250 of “Furisode Climbing the Pyramid"" that she received a scholarship of 12 pounds a month from the Egyptian government)."
Abdel-Kader Hatem與中曾根康弘
Abdel-Kader Hatem with Yasuhiro Nakasone
"另一方面,小池於1985年出版的書《音譯:Onna女性 no 的Jinmyaku-Zukuri人脈建立 ((我如何以女人的身分經營人脈關係)》指出,她的父親(小池裕郎)很早就認識中曾根。她本人是在小學時代即已見到中曾根,在每個冬天,中曾根都向家人送去了一堆在中曾根選舉區群馬縣產的韭菜,並與他的兄弟一起吃了。
On the other hand Koike's book, ""Onna no Jinmyaku-Zukuri (How I made personal connections as a woman)"" published in 1985 states that her father (Yujiro Koike) had known Nakasone for a long time. She herself first met Nakasone when she was an elementary school student, every winter Nakasone sent her family a bunch of leeks produced in Gunma prefecture, Nakasone’s electoral district, and she ate them with his* brother." 🌐*Chenchen註:應該是She ate them with HER brother.,,
1973年10月6日,埃及爆發了十月戰爭(Yom Kippur War)。 埃及和敘利亞軍隊對部署在蘇伊士運河和戈蘭高地的以色列部隊發動了進攻,試圖奪回1967年六日戰爭(六月戰爭)中以色列佔領的領土。
🌐Chenchen註:這是知名的第四次以阿戰爭,後來引發第一次石油危機,各界認為這是阿拉伯國家在二戰之後,第一次聯手反對西方帝國主義。維基百科:贖罪日戰爭,又稱第四次以阿戰爭、齋月戰爭、十月戰爭...起源於埃及與敘利亞分別攻擊六年前被以色列佔領的西奈半島和戈蘭高地。戰爭的頭一至兩日埃敘聯盟佔了上風,但此後戰況逆轉。至第二周,敘軍退出戈蘭高地。在西奈,以軍在兩軍之間攻擊,越過原來的停火線蘇伊士運河。直到聯合國停火令生效為止,以軍甚至包圍了埃及的主力部隊。 https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E8%B4%96%E7%BD%AA%E6%97%A5%E6%88%B0%E7%88%AD
On 6 October 1973, the October War (Yom Kippur War) broke out in Egypt. Egyptian and Syrian forces launched an attack on Israeli forces deployed in the Suez Canal and Golan Heights in an attempt to recapture territory occupied by Israel in the Six Day War (June War) in 1967.
"為了支持埃及和敘利亞,阿拉伯石油輸出國組織(OAPEC)將石油價格提高了1.4倍,並引發了第一次石油危機。 日本被OAPEC視為“不友好”國家之一,由於採取了削減石油供應的措施,日本遭受了經濟危機。 日本政府派副首相三木武夫和前外交大臣小坂健太郎等人前往沙烏地阿拉伯,埃及和阿爾及利亞,要求這些國家將日本改變為“友好國家”類別(所謂的“石油乞討外交”)。 。
In support of Egypt and Syria, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC), raised oil prices by 1.4 times and caused the First Oil Crisis. Japan was considered one of the ""unfriendly"" countries by OAPEC and suffered an economic crisis as a result of measures to cut oil supplies. The Japanese government sent Deputy Prime Minister Takeo Miki and former Foreign Minister Zentaro Kosaka and others to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Algeria to ask those countries to change Japan to a ""friendly country"" category (the so-called ""oil begging diplomacy"")."
(待續...或是直接點原文連結)
https://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/60643
nothing written台灣 在 Marz23 Facebook 的最讚貼文
🌟⚔️
即使脆弱不堪
即使曾經失敗
但站在需要保護的人前面
總是能莫名學會勇敢
翻開命運的牌
只會有我肯定的存在
Marz23 ft.JESSE 【Break Me Down】
數位正式發行 🎧 http://marz23.lnk.to/BreakMeDownFA
歌詞版 MV 8:30pm首播 🎬 https://Marz23.lnk.to/MVBMDFA
Marz23 繼2019年【陪你失敗】、【我不是饒舌歌手】、【寂寞男孩】三首單曲不斷強襲華語樂壇、攻占各大排行,其中【我不是饒舌歌手】更在5個月內就突破500萬觀看人次,奠定Marz23在樂壇的新氣象。
相同模板的加乘效應,無所匹敵的雙重升級
【Break Me Down】特別邀請日本傳奇搖滾歌手 JESSE 合作,橫跨中文、日文、台語、英文 4種語言,歌詞充滿對生命的熱情與不畏挫折的堅毅信念,只要相信自己,沒有什麼可以把我打敗 ! JESSE與Marz23有相同的音樂背景,是”RIZE”與”The Bonez”主唱,有著樂團主唱與饒舌歌手的雙重身分,影響後輩無數個樂團。兩人的創作撞擊,將這首歌的精神和能量,提升到另一個檔次,也完成了“台灣 x 日本”Rap rock的首度跨界合作。
たとえ弱いとしても
失敗したとしても
守るべきの人の目の前に立つと
いつも勇気が出る
運命のカードをフリップしたら
そこには僕の認める存在しかない
Even if we’re at our weakest
Even if we have failed
When we stand in front of those who need our protection
We always learn to be brave
When I flip my destiny cards
There will only be what I recognize
Legendary Japanese rock singer JESSE is featured in new single Break Me Down. Written in four languages (Mandarin, Japanese, Taiwanese and English), it celebrates the passion for life and the strong beliefs in oneself. The message is clear: As long as I have faith in myself, nothing can break me down! JESSE and Marz23 share similar backgrounds: Both are rappers and lead singers of a band (RIZE and The Bonez) who have inspired numerous other bands. The collaboration brings the spirit and the energy of the song to another level, and it’s the first rap rock collaboration between Taiwan and Japan.
#Marz23
#JESSE
#BreakMeDown
nothing written台灣 在 Hey It's Dena Youtube 的最佳解答
✧ Listen to “July” HERE 來聽歌
Youtube MV: https://youtu.be/sEJypi8BIls
Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/u83d2ckk
KKBOX: https://tinyurl.com/3sr2bd76
iTunes: https://tinyurl.com/zjuvsc7d
Apple Music: https://tinyurl.com/zjuvsc7d
__
✧ Lyrics & Chords 歌詞和弦
Written by 詞曲: Dena 張粹方
Key: Bb
Shape: Capo3, G major key shape
VERSE1: G D/F# Am C
it’s like the summer’s gone but it’s still july
the light is bouncing off your skin
like a ray of black and white
sometimes you feel like there’s nothing else you can do to make things right
no matter how hard you try
you still feel like you’re not enough and you don’t know why
Em D/F# C
just breathe a little
CHORUS: G D/F# Am C (Cm)
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
take your time and sing along to your very own tempo
you’ll realize that you will be just fine
Verse2:
sometimes you can’t help but compare yourself
with whoever showed up on your feed
they all seem to be doing so much better
sometimes you feel like there’s nothing else you can do to make things right
no matter how hard you try
you still feel like you’re not enough
you’re running out of time
just breathe a little
CHORUS:
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
take your time and sing along to your very own tempo
you’ll realize that you will be just fine
Bridge: Am Bm7 C D
now who says you’re not good enough
cus to me your
perfect just the way you are
so don’t you let those hurtful words
bring you down oh i know this feeling
way to well
CHORUS:
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
Em D/F# C Cm
take your time to recognize what i see in you
you’re perfectly imperfect
and i love you
oh i do
love you
__
✧ Social Medias 社群
INSTAGRAM
https://www.instagram.com/dena_chang/ @dena_chang
FACEBOOK 粉專
https://www.facebook.com/denachmusic
__
✧ Business Inquiries 工作洽談
[email protected]
__
✧ About Dena 有關Dena
Dena 張粹方是一位創作歌手,近年發行了自己的作品如《你愛他》《Don't Worry》等熱門流行歌曲,在各平台造成迴響外,作曲與演唱實力也深受業界肯定。作品與聲音收錄在多名兩岸歌手的專輯中,其中包含『林俊傑』、『楊丞琳』與『陳零九』等。Dena同時也是一位音樂生活紀錄 YouTuber,經常分享英文學習、音樂評論、生活紀錄等題材,深受年輕粉絲喜愛。
#Dena #July #Pop #英文歌曲 #全新創作英文單曲 #張粹方
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LqLm9evkQSQ/hqdefault.jpg)
nothing written台灣 在 Hey It's Dena Youtube 的精選貼文
Hey, 你很棒!給自己多一點耐心與信心,你會沒事的!
大家有沒有對自己的表現很失望的時候,在社群媒體發達的時代,不小心開始跟看似過著完美生活的其他人比較,覺得自己不夠好。
去年七月的時候,我經歷了一次無限自我懷疑的低潮,做什麼事都提不起勁,也沒有自信自己可以達到心目中想要成為的樣子......
《JULY》在那時誕生了。
ㄧ首是我想要跟曾經的我一樣,正經歷著這樣的感覺的人說
「每個人都不完美,但我們每個人都走在自己不完美卻又獨一無二的道路發光發熱。所以,給自己一點信心,因為對我來說,你一直都如那七月熾熱的陽光般耀眼。」
一首鼓勵了我自己,也希望可以感染給我最可愛的你們!
“I promise that you’ll feel better when you
take your time to recognize what I see in you”
—JULY by Dena
__
✧ Listen to “July” 來聽歌
Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/u83d2ckk
KKBOX: https://tinyurl.com/3sr2bd76
iTunes: https://tinyurl.com/zjuvsc7d
Apple Music: https://tinyurl.com/zjuvsc7d
__
✧ Lyrics 歌詞
Written by 詞曲: Dena 張粹方
it’s like the summer’s gone but it’s still July
仍是盛夏七月,卻彷彿夏日已逝
the light is bouncing off your skin
光線在肌膚上反彈
like a ray of black and white
忽明忽暗
sometimes you feel like there’s nothing else you can do to make things right
有時你會覺得,怎麼做都不對
no matter how hard you try
就算竭盡所能
you still feel like you’re not enough and you don’t know why
依舊覺得自己不夠好,卻不知為何
just breathe a little
那就先喘口氣吧
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
你無需將全世界都扛在肩上
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
我保證 你會好多的 只要你
take your time and sing along to your very own tempo
慢慢來,隨著自己的節奏歌唱
you’ll realize that you will be just fine
你就會發現,你會沒事的
sometimes you can’t help but compare yourself
有時你會不禁將自己
with whoever showed up on your feed
和身邊的其他人比較
they all seem to be doing so much better
他們似乎都過得比較好
sometimes you feel like there’s nothing else you can do to make things right
有時你會覺得,怎麼做都不對
no matter what how hard you try
就算竭盡所能
you still feel like you’re not enough
依舊覺得自己不夠好
you’re running out of time
彷彿永遠趕不上
just breathe a little
那就跟著我一起深呼吸吧
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
你無需將全世界都扛在肩上
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
我保證 你會好多的 只要你
take your time and sing along to your very own tempo
慢慢來,隨著自己的節奏歌唱
you’ll realize that you will be just fine
你會發現,一切都會好轉
now who says you’re not good enough
誰說你不夠好
cus to me you’re
對我而言
perfect just the way you are
你就是那恰到好處
so don’t you let those hurtful words
所以別讓那些閒言閒語
bring you down oh i know this feeling
輕易將你擊敗,我深知那是什麼感覺
way to well
我真的懂
you don’t have to live under the weight of the whole world on your shoulders
你無需將全世界都扛在肩上
i promise that you’ll feel better when you
我保證 你會好多的 只要你
take your time to recognize what i see in you
慢下來,看進我眼中的你
you’re perfectly imperfect
雖然你不完美
and i love you
但我依然愛你
oh i do
你有我
love you
愛著你
__
✧ Credits
詞曲 Written by: Dena
吉他 Guitars: Chris Condon
貝斯 Bass: Caleb Mundy
鍵盤鼓組 Keyboards & Drums: Dr. Ford
和聲 Background Vocals: Dena
和聲編寫 Background Vocals Arrangements: Dena
製作 Produced / Mixed / Mastered: Dr. Ford
影像出品 Video Production Company: TRU-BLU Visual
導演 Director: 高真 TRU_D
封面拍攝/設計 Graphic Design:高真 TRU_D
Special thanks to $$uperCandy 唐紹崴, my colleagues from Full Music Production 好撐音樂 and Vivi Jiang.
__
✧ Social Medias 社群
INSTAGRAM
https://www.instagram.com/dena_chang/ @dena_chang
FACEBOOK 粉專
https://www.facebook.com/denachmusic
__
✧ Business Inquiries 工作洽談
[email protected]
__
✧ About Dena 有關Dena
Dena 張粹方是一位新世代的新媒體實力派創作歌手。近期發行了創作《你愛他》、《Daydreaming》,在 YouTube 創造了破百萬收聽的佳績外,今年獨立發行自己全創作英文單曲《July》,更是在各平台造成迴響,首週突破KKBOX西洋榜前50名。同時作曲與演唱實力也深受業界肯定,創作與聲音收錄在多名家喻戶曉歌手的專輯中,其中包含『林俊傑』、『弦子』、台灣知名歌手『楊丞琳』與『陳零九』等。Dena同時也是一位生活紀錄 YouTuber,經常分享英文學習、音樂評論、生活紀錄等題材,深受年輕粉絲喜愛。
#Dena #July #Pop #英文歌曲 #全新創作英文單曲 #張粹方
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sEJypi8BIls/hqdefault.jpg)
nothing written台灣 在 transitionofficial Youtube 的最佳貼文
前進樂團用了以前的經驗來寫這首歌!
A song written from Transition's own experience, Nothing is Impossible
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/M49U7cVNZaM/hqdefault.jpg)