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

Happy 6 months old to this darling boy!

Yup, it's quite unbelievable that it's been half a year since this baby came into the world. Every day, I count my blessings for having him in my life and how he has made everything better and happier for all of us.

He has started eating apple, potato and carrot purée and is curious about anything that goes into his mouth. He drools all the time and likes to chomp on everything he sees, including my shirt, his fingers, toys and cutlery.

He sleeps besides me and wakes up a few times every night, looking for Mama and needing his milk before he dozes off again. After over four months, he finally learnt how to side latch which makes my nights easier and I love the way we sleep so close to each other.

Many people mistake him for a girl because of his thick mop of hair and I've already cut it thrice because it gets long so fast. He also has cute dimples on his round and chubby face which makes me wanna kiss him a thousand times a day.

He is starting to experience separation anxiety and at times only wants Mama and no one else to carry him. It's funny how a glimpse of me or just the sound of my voice can trigger a big reaction in him, and while this phase of being needed 24/7 is tiring, I cherish it so, so much.

A couple of nights ago, the big girl came up to me and said "Thank you for giving birth to Ansel and bringing him into our lives", the sister said "He is the cutest baby in the world" while the brother said "We are so lucky to have a boy cos' I have a Didi now." Awww. It's plain to see how much they adore this baby and how deeply he is loved each day.

Thank you for brightening up our days with your contagious smile and hearty laughter. Thank you for being you. We love you so, so much, dear Ansel! ❤

#ahappymum #lastborn #6monthsold #timeflieswhenyouareamum #startingtoeat #youareworthit #thankyouforcomingintomylife

Dear Government,

There are more than 2000 nail salon owners and over 10,000 hardworking manicurists in Malaysia. Together we are appealing to our government to urgently reconsider removing Pedicure & Manicure services from the negative list and allow us to reopen in PHASE 2.

How are we high risk? Your decision is putting our livelihood in a shamble. How can we survive until phase 4?!

Nail cutting, cleaning and nail deformity correction are ESSENTIAL SERVICES. Our desperate customers are calling us nonstop. Many people are not able to care for their nails due to health and medical conditions and need to get their nails cut professionally.

Our fingernails and toenails are like little shields protecting our fingers and toes; not keeping our nails healthy makes the tissue beneath them vulnerable to infection via things that we come contact with. Proper nail care can prevent fungal infections, painful ingrown fingernails and toenails, and other nail and skin related diseases.

Medical doctors are also among our clienteles. They too, have to trim their nails short, clean and without sharp edges to ensure they do not hurt their patients accidentally.

There are elderly with Parkinson’s who need special care to cut their nails without getting hurt. We also cater to Diabetic patients who need special care to avoid risk of infection if they get into cuts from improper nail cutting.

Athletes who are active in sports also need to treat thick and painful calluses from friction and excessive training.

Yes! Nail cutting is an ESSENTIAL SERVICE.
Our job is a skilled profession and we cannot work from home. Thousands of us are losing our job and struggling to make ends meet, particularly single moms and young women.

We have been following very strict SOPs at the salon and will continue to do so. There has been NO CLUSTER from nail salons.

Try understanding our industry and you would see that we are not a HIGH-RISK industry! Phase 4 classification must be revised with consideration of all the above facts.

#whiteflagnailsalons
#savenailsalons
#MANI
#whiteflagcampaign
#nailsalonsmalaysia
#ismailsabri #rinaharun #azminali #alexlinggi #mitimalaysia #muhyiddinyassin #hishammuddinhussein
Malaysia Affiliation of Nail Salons Industry (MANI)

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”

Hello friends! Today we're going to share with you how to make New York Levain Bakery style chocolate chip walnut cookies.

Chocolate chip cookies are a timeless classic, an unparalleled snack. No one can resist the comfort of a chocolate chip cookie. Like many of you, we’ve searched far for the perfect chocolate chip cookie recipe. And finally we’re so happy to find a perfect one. It's a copycat version of a very famous New York City bakery “Levain Bakery”. But the taste is amazing, and the size is really big, 6 oz each, but we modify the size to 4 oz each, the size is perfect.

Levain bakery style chocolate chip cookies are really delicious, they are golden brown on the outside, and soft gooey and rich center inside. It’s super simple to make and tastes perfect every time. if you love walnuts and chocolate, then this is a cookie for you. Hopefully you guys will like it.  

📍 Please follow me on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sweetdumplingofficial/
📍 Welcome to follow me on FB: https://www.facebook.com/sweet.dumpling.studio
----------
How to make Levain Style Chocolate Chip Walnut Cookie
Here is the Levain Style Chocolate Chip Walnut Cookie Recipe

☞  Yields:  6 four-ounce cookies or 4 six-ounce cookies

✎ Ingredients
COLD unsalted butter  112g, cut into small cubes
granulated sugar 50g
brown sugar 75g
cake flour 70g
all-purpose flour 105g
large egg 1
baking powder 2g
baking soda 2g
salt 2g
walnut 82g
64% chocolate chip 150g

✎ Instructions
1. Sift the cake flour, all-purpose flour, baking soda, baking powder together, and add in salt, mix well and set aside.
2. Break the walnuts into two equal parts with your fingers.
3. Beat the egg and set aside.
4. In a large mixing bowl, cream together cold cubed butter, brown sugar, granulated sugar and egg on low speed and until mixed well.
5. Add all the dry ingredients in, including cake flour, all-purpose flour, baking soda, baking powder, beat on low speed until the wet and dry ingredients are all mixed together. Scraping down the sides of the bowl if necessary.
6. Simply fold in the chocolate chips and walnuts into the bowl, and mix until just combined to avoid over mixing.
7. For best results, refrigerate the dough for 15 minutes before forming the cookie dough. Cover plastic wrap to avoid dryness.
8. Divide the dough into 6 equal pieces about 4oz (113g) each. Roughly shape the cookie dough into loosely shaped balls.
9. Cover with plastic wrap and refrigerate the cookie doughs for 45 minutes.
10. Preheat the oven to 220°C, and bake for 12-14 minutes. Bake 3 cookies at one time.
11. Once baked. Let cool on the baking sheet for 30 minutes before serving.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter:
00:00 opening
00:35 Ingredients
01:27 preparation
03:47 how to make cookie dough
07:14 cookie dough weight and shape
08:44 oven setting and baking
09:43 best ever chocolate chip cookies
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
#ChocolateChipCookie
#LevainBakery
#easyrecipes

Hello, I am umino.Thank you for watching this video.This description uses Google Translate.

People who don't understand Japanese can't understand what I'm talking about in this video. So I will explain it in the summary column.
日本語が分からない人はこの動画で私が喋っていることが全く理解できないと思う。なので概要欄の方で説明をします。

This time, I used my nails to clean my ears. To tell the truth, it's no good, but it's not so different from the sound of cleaning your ears with your fingers. Everyone will have noticed. But there are some things you shouldn't say.
今回の動画は爪で耳かき。これを言ったらおしまいなんだけど、指で耳かきするのとあまり変わらない。みんな薄々気付いているだろう。でも言わない方がいいこともある。

It's also useless to say this, but it's boring because this video only cleans my ears. You can lie down on your screen and sleep right now. I can only say this. Most people don't want ASMR videos to be interesting, so don't worry about that.
あとこれも言ったらおしまいなんだけど、この動画は淡々と耳かきしてるだけだからつまらないよ。今すぐ画面を伏せて寝ていい。これだけは言える。大体の人はASMR動画に面白さを求めてる人は誰もいないだろうからそんなことはどうでもいいや。

Overseas viewers reading this subtitle, why not sleep early? Can you sleep soundly after reading the subtitles? The contradiction of listening to a sound that makes me sleepy while reading a lot of text while bathing in the light of a smartphone. I don't understand the meaning anymore.
この字幕を読んでいる海外の視聴者さん、「暇ですね」。字幕を読んだ後にぐっすり眠れますか？スマートフォンのライトを浴びながら、たくさんの文字を読んでるのに、眠くなる音を聴くという矛盾。もう意味が分からないですよ、私は。

How long does it take for everyone to go to bed after going to bed? I'm sure many people have messed with their smartphones and watched Twitter or Instagram for about 30 minutes. Sleep soon.
みんなはベッドに入ってから寝るまでに何分くらいかかる？スマホをいじって、ついついTwitterかInstagramを見て、30分くらい経ってるなんて人もたくさんいるだろう。早く寝ろ。

It seems that some people spend too much time searching for ASMR videos to sleep and can't sleep. It doesn't make sense. It is more likely that the quality of sleep will improve if we stop cultivating new things and repeat the favorites we have heard so far.
寝るためのASMR動画を探すことに時間をかけすぎて、眠れなくなる人もいるらしい。本末転倒ではないか。もういっそのこと新規開拓をやめて、今まで聴いてきたお気に入りをリピートしていた方が睡眠の質が上がりそうだ。

By the way, there was something I wanted to talk about fingers. Does everyone overseas pick up booger? I used to talk about the telop in the video a long time ago, but I didn't hear it from people overseas, so I asked.
そういえば指について話したいことがあったんだ。海外のみんなは鼻くそをほじりますか？昔、動画内のテロップで話したことなんだけど、海外の人には聞いてなかったので聞いてみた。

You who want to say, "It's not your finger, it's your nose." I know what I mean, but premature ejaculation is a problem. "How do you pick a booger? Yes, a finger." It seems that people can't talk to people who use cotton swabs or gloves only to pick a booger. I don't think he'll watch a video that uses his fingers to clean his ears.
「指じゃなくて鼻の話じゃねえか」と言いたいそこのあなた。言いたいことは分かるが早漏は困るよ。「鼻くそはどうやってほじる？そうだ、指だ。」鼻くそをほじるためだけに綿棒を使ったり、手袋をはめる人とは話が合わなそうだ。そんなやつが指を使って耳かきする動画を見るんじゃねえ。

People overseas have a higher image of nose than Japanese people. I got interested. Isn't there a lot of dust on the nose if the nose is tall? When.
海外の人は日本人に比べたら鼻が高いイメージがある。私は気になってしまった。鼻が高いと溜まる鼻くその量も多いのではないのか？と。

Please tell me if you enjoy picking booger at the end of the day, or if you just pick up your booger on the go.
一日の終わりに鼻くそをほじるのが趣味のあなたや、人目を忘れてほじっちゃうホジラーのあなたも教えてください。

Actually, there was a very important question overseas as to whether or not to clean the ears, but it was too late to remember, so I will ask another time.
本当は海外では耳かきするのかという非常に重要な疑問があったのだが、今思い出してしまったので別の機会に聞くことにする。

Good night.
おやすみの。


イヤホンまたはヘッドホンをつけてお楽しみください。もし動画が良かったら高評価を押していただけると励みになります。

SNS
Twitter: https://goo.gl/Y9uFpW
Twitter(通知用): https://goo.gl/WHEa8c
Instagram: https://goo.gl/sL8M1r
サブチャンネル: https://goo.gl/C7yDgn

無劣化音声の購入はこちらから
https://bit.ly/2ktOOjm

Copyright © 2017 UMINO ASMR All Rights Reserved.

Hi, everyone. :) Today we'll show you how to make a delicious classic dessert: Classic New York Cheesecake.

There are so many different types of cheesecakes, and each one has its own unique recipe and ingredients. But New York cheesecake is my favorite dessert. It tastes fantastic and ultra-rich, creamy and dense. New York cheesecake uses digestive biscuits in the bottom, and a cream cheese base, and sour cream to create a lighter and denser taste.

This recipe doesn’t require a water bath, so it’s easy even for beginners. And no worry it’ll be cracks or sinking. The cake is classic and perfect. Hope you like. Enjoy. :)


This is an #ASMR ver, you can check out the other ver that with BGM and Voices in Chinese if you like:
https://youtu.be/xiPI6IsXa08
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic New York Cheesecake Recipes
Pan Size: a 7” cake pan (Ø 18cm)

✎ Ingredients
☞ For the crust
digestive biscuits 200g
unsalted butter 80g, melted
a pinch of Fleur de Sel or coarse sea salt

☞ For the filling
cream cheese 500g, room temperature
granulated sugar 160g
cake flour 15g
lemon zest 1tbsp
lemon juice 13g
egg 2
sour cream 300g

✎ Instructions
☞ For the crust
1. Put the digestive biscuits into food processor and blend to a fine crumb. Or you can place the biscuits in a plastic bag and crush with a rolling pin to fine crumbs.
2. Add the crumbs into a bowl and pour the melted butter and a pinch of salt. Stir until well combined as the wet sand texture.
3. Use a towel paper to butter the bottom and sides of the cake pan. Then line with the prepared parchment paper on bottom and sides.
4. Spoon the crumbs into the bottom, use the cup to firmly press them down. For sides, make a even layer of crust around the side, press the edges as well.  It should almost reach the top. Of course, you can use your fingers for the sides. Place in fridge for 30 mins to chill.

✎ For the filling
1. In a large bowl , add cream cheese and sugar, test the cream cheese with your finger, it should feel softer. Use a hand mixer to beat in medium low speed, until smooth and sugar has dissolved.
2. Add lemon zest, lemon juice, and sift the flour into the bowl. Beat it in low speed to mix well.
3. Add eggs, keep beating in low speed until smooth.
4. Add sour cream, beat until just combined.
5. Pour the batter into the pan, gently tap the pan on the table to remove air bubbles.
6. Preheat the oven to 150°C, and bake in 50~60 minutes.
7. Time's up. Cool in oven with a door ajar for 1 hour. Then remove from oven to let cool, and chill in fridge for 6~8 hours before serving.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
#NewYorkCheesecake
#Dessert
#eastrecipes