關於 test bed ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

#notarantbutaCONFESSION

Mummy said she’s on the verge of breaking down…
𝙎𝙡𝙚𝙚𝙥 𝙙𝙚𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙫𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣. Woke up every 2 hours to pump/ breastfeed is really crazy. By the time I’m done, I’m probably left with another 30 mins or so for the next session. I’m not sure how some mothers can sleep in between sessions 😔 I skipped 1-2 session so that I can sleep but usually end up with engorged breast. I don’t even need any alarm to wake me up 😵‍💫

𝙁𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙜𝙪𝙚. On daily pain killer 💊 is a must for me in order for bae to do my wound dressing. It is cleaned twice a day. It’s an open wound, cut vertically on my existing scar. 🩸Fresh pink/ red flesh can be seen on my lower abdomen but so far I had probably only seen it less than 5 times. I left the details to hubby 🙋🏻‍♂️and he’ll summarize for me whether my condition is improving or worsen bcs I have very weak heart seeing “bloody-gruesome” wound like this. But so far, thankfully, it’s healing well. 🙏🏻 It’s been 2 weeks since, doc told me I need a minimum 1 month for the wound to “close up”. Let’s hope for the best!💯

𝘽𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙠𝙙𝙤𝙬𝙣. Despite staying indoor and ordered everything online, number of Covid cases is still on the high side. 😒 Hospitals are running out of bed, front liners are breaking down. Many committed suicide because of the continuous lockdown (failed gov). Rakyat are suffering. 💔 Me too, the need to socialize and to dine out on my fav food is so far-fetched (Impossible! Unrealistic!) with the current situation. But everyone in Malaysia has been like this since, what? last year? I even lost count of the time. 😢 But I know it has been like this for a very very very long time… Trapped at home for way too long felt like living in hell! Did we all just wasted our lives for the past 2 years waiting for our gov to make things better! Sigh… I only saw how things got worse! 😮‍💨

𝙋𝙤𝙤𝙧 𝘼𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙩𝙞𝙩𝙚. One of the reason is due to my wound too. 🤕 And with weaker body, contributes to weaker state of mind too due to restricted movement etc. Confinement food is also not what I enjoy when I was having poor appetite 🤢. Still prefer food which offer balance meals and variety. 👩🏻‍⚕️Yes, doc said I have no food restriction after I clarified with them. I even showered daily bcs of my visit to NICU and hospital for the first two weeks🏥, followed by my admission in hosp due to my csec wound. Hygiene is very important 🛀, especially during the pandemic. ⚠️ I do not want to bring any viruses home to my family. 🦠 Not at all.

𝙂𝘿𝙈. Gestational diabetes is high blood sugar (glucose) 📝 that develops during pregnancy and usually disappears after giving birth. I was on controlled diet 🍛 throughout my pregnancy and I will have to take another test this August to confirm if GDM still exist. And because of this, I’m also a lil bit depressed 😪 bcs I can’t reward myself with some good dessert or ice creams!🍦 This is the real zero quality of life when you don’t get to enjoy life up to your liking/ preference 🖤! Not when you’re a foodie right! Sorry for the zero update on my food ig @𝙨𝙝𝙚𝙚𝙖𝙩𝙨_𝙨𝙝𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙤𝙠𝙨 too! 🥵

I just hope all the bad and unhappy times will be over soon. 👎 This is not a rant, just a confession of what’s really going on in my pregnancy journey🤰🏻. Not all motherhood journey is a bed of roses. But comparing this to my cancer journey, this is definitely much better 🍀. Because out of the pain and misery, I have Isabelle with me 👶🏻. She’s healthy, sweet, adorable and quite manageable so far. Just a lil bit out of control when she’s hungry🍼! Hahaha! I’m mastering it soon on how to deal with her tantrum 😆 Just offer her the boobies🤱🏻!

𝘼𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙚 𝙢𝙤𝙢𝙢𝙖 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚 𝙢𝙚! 𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙧𝙤𝙖𝙙 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙗𝙚 𝙗𝙪𝙢𝙥𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙜𝙞𝙣𝙜, 𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙙𝙤𝙣’𝙩 𝙜𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙪𝙥 𝙮𝙚𝙖! 𝙊𝙣𝙚 𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙥 𝙖𝙩 𝙖 𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙚, 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙨 𝙬𝙞𝙡𝙡 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙪𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙜𝙚𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙧. 𝙒𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙙𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙖 𝙜𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝙟𝙤𝙗 𝙩𝙤 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙜𝙧𝙤𝙬 𝙖 𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙞 𝙝𝙪𝙢𝙖𝙣! 𝙃𝙤𝙬 𝙖𝙢𝙖𝙯𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩! 𝙉𝙤 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙘𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙪𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙥𝙤𝙬𝙚𝙧 𝙤𝙛 𝙖 𝙢𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙮𝙚𝙖𝙝! 𝙒𝙚𝙡𝙡 𝙬𝙞𝙨𝙝𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙖𝙡𝙧𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩 ❤️ 𝙡𝙤𝙩𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙡𝙤𝙫𝙚 💋

🌈 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘰 𝘐 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰’𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘦! 💛

#babyisabelleNQY #fullybreastfeed

#40weekspregnant #40weeks2dayspregnant #10monthspregnant
EDD: 22 June 2021

𝙏𝙬𝙤 𝙙𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙙𝙪𝙚 and still counting 😅

Thought I’ll just post some updates here to give u guys some sense of relieves from all the silence 🥲 So this is what it’s like if you’re planning to have your labour done here in HKL (my first time here too)…

🟠 21 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2021
10am+ 👉🏻 Got myself registered for admission
11am+ 👉🏻 Nurses performed ECG to check baby’s heart rate while waiting for bed’s availability in the ward
12pm+ 👉🏻 Was told to wait at home bcs bed might only be available after 7pm bcs currently ward is full [𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙮 “𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙢𝙞𝙘-𝙞𝙣𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙧𝙚𝙙” 𝙗𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙚𝙨 𝙢𝙖𝙙𝙚 𝙙𝙪𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙚 😹]
5pm+ 👉🏻 Nurse called to inform there’s finally bed available and asked to “check in” immediately
6pm+ 👉🏻 Given some orientation in the ward, was told no outside food, no visitors, different classes of beds available and where to get new linen if you’ve stained your clothes/ bed
7pm+ 👉🏻 Set up branula on my hand. Changed to hospital attire (for all pregnant mom) and settle down for the day (night)

🟠 22 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2021
👉🏻 Did a tablet induce
👉🏻 Finger Test to check dilation, only 1cm opening. It’s a bloody mess and horrifying procedure for the first time me 😅
👉🏻 Doc decided to proceed with induction using 𝙁𝙤𝙡𝙚𝙮 𝘽𝙪𝙡𝙗 (to insert balloon) - another similar Finger Test procedure 🥵 This will help to ripen / soften the cervix and dilate better. Will leave it for 12 hours, in the meantime I’ll do some walking in the room
👉🏻 Had my first contraction. It started from the lower abdomen and the pain was excruciating. I tried to hold it by doing some deep breath but damn, it didn’t last me long enough. I end up telling the nurse I need some pain relief
👉🏻 I was given a jab on my butt and the pain subside, I fell into deep sleep till the next morning (𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙗𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙨𝙩 𝙨𝙡𝙚𝙚𝙥 𝙄 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙝𝙖𝙙 𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙄 𝙜𝙤𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙜𝙣𝙖𝙣𝙩🤣)
👉🏻 Bloody discharge is normal after that

🟠 23 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2021
👉🏻 Woke up still feeling a lil bit drowsy. And it’s 4cm dilation now, but the opening didn’t improve further, it stayed the same throughout the day, so I was not allowed to proceed with labour yet
👉🏻 Decided to continue with more walking in the room
👉🏻 Doc removed the balloon 12 hours later from the first insert
👉🏻 No further contraction throughout the day, maybe there is (based on ECG reading) but it’s very mild and bearable
👉🏻 Bloody discharge still continue, constant changing of linen and “sarong” to keep my space clean and comfortable 😂

🟠 24 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2021
5am+ 👉🏻 Showered. Washed my hair. Was reluctant at first bcs there’s no hot water and the water was as cold as ice! But I can’t withstand my messy and oily hair anymore. Now feeling clean, fresh and good 🥰
6am+ 👉🏻 Doc came to check. Another finger test! 𝘽𝙮 𝙣𝙤𝙬, 𝙄’𝙢 𝙪𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙞𝙩 𝙖𝙡𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙮, 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙗𝙞𝙩𝙚 𝙢𝙮 𝙩𝙚𝙚𝙩𝙝 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙙𝙤 𝙞𝙩 🤯 No improvement. Dilation is still at 4cm. They’ll check again 6 hours later 😮‍💨

🤰🏻 𝙄𝙩’𝙨 𝙗𝙚𝙚𝙣 4 𝙙𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙡, 𝙙𝙞𝙙𝙣’𝙩 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩 𝙢𝙮 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙮 𝙩𝙤 𝙗𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙡𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙗𝙘𝙨 𝙄 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙜𝙝𝙩 𝙄 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙩𝙤𝙡𝙙 𝙣𝙤 𝙢𝙖𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙧 𝙬𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙄 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙜𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙗𝙞𝙧𝙩𝙝 𝙤𝙣 22 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2021, 𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙚𝙭𝙘𝙚𝙚𝙙 😵‍💫 𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙙𝙤𝙘 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙬𝙨 𝙗𝙚𝙨𝙩 𝙡𝙖𝙝.. 𝙄’𝙢 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙙𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙗𝙤𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚.. 𝙀𝙫𝙚𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙣𝙚𝙭𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙢𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙧 𝙜𝙤𝙩 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙜𝙚𝙙 𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙩 𝙣𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩. 𝙉𝙤𝙬 𝙄’𝙢 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙖𝙡𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙘𝙤𝙡𝙙 24/7 𝘼𝘾 𝙧𝙤𝙤𝙢…

🌈 Overall experience was quite pleasant here. The two - bedded AC room, the quieter environment due to Covid, the close monitoring of medical team towards pregnant mothers (performing ECG & BP every few hours).. Couldn’t ask for more lah for a GH standard 💯

The only thing I wished I could have now is better food, at least 𝙝𝙤𝙩 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙗𝙞𝙜𝙜𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙖 𝙜𝙤𝙤𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙤𝙣! But I know this is not possible, that’s why I said it’s a wish! 😂 Trust me, the food portion here is too little, can only last me a good 2 hours! I’m already craving for more meat 😆

☀️ Today is another brand new day to restart. Let’s hope labour can happen soon so I can go home to my family ❤️

#pregnancyjourney #jennslifeaftercancer #spreadlovecreatehope #babydiverinthemaking #cancersurvivor #ovariancancer #stage3

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”

Play.Goose 女子2人による平井 大さんの「Stand by me, Stand by you.」のCoverプレミア公開です！女子がオトコゴコロを、男子がオンナゴコロを学ぶための新企画『Switch Session』第2弾！ぜひリアルタイムでご覧ください！

▷歌詞字幕付き　※字幕をオンにしてお楽しみください！

平井 大 / Stand by me, Stand by you.（Lyric Video）
https://youtu.be/Zy_KuTFwot4

#平井大　#StandbymeStandbyyou #PlayGoose　#沙夜香 #マナミ
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【LIVE情報】
2年ぶりのライブツアー【TEST BED #3 STAND NOT ALONE】決定！
Play.Goose 新常態 “1st” LIVE TOUR

【TEST BED #3 STAND NOT ALONE】
9/16（木）＠東京 渋谷duo MUSIC EXCHANGE
9/25（土）＠名古屋ReNY Limited
9/30（木）＠大阪BIG CAT

P.G＠STAND ALONEアプリ内で受付中！
アプリを最新版にしてお申し込み下さい。
iPhone:https://apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383
Android:https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app

新常態のツアーは、オンラインとの"ハイブリッドライブ"となっています。.

※【全公演ドネーション付き生中継配信あり】
視聴方法：P.G＠STAND ALONE内で生中継（固定カメラ + PAミックス音声）
料金：無料
ドネーション：１口1000円から5口まで
ドネーション返礼品：スペシャルポストカード（公演会場での写真付き）
ドネーションページ：https://playgoose.official.ec/

詳細はHPをご覧ください！
https://playgoose.jp/news/1598

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【P.G@STAND ALONE】
Play.Gooseメンバー自らが開発に携わり、新常態でも安心・安全に、ファンとメンバーをつなぐ公式プラットフォームアプリ「P.G＠STAND ALONE」をリリース！「P.G＠STAND ALONE」では、最新の情報やメンバーのSNS情報がまとめて確認できるほか、無料で会員登録を行うと見られる限定コンテンツや、イベントなどとも連動しています。

▷アプリの無料ダウンロードはこちらから
iPhone：https://apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383
Android：https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Play.Gooseチャンネル登録よろしくお願いします！！】
こちらへ→ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCx66obAJ42B0XwHIm_iupkw?sub_confirmation=1
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Release情報】
▷Play.Gooseが日本代表として韓国ドラマ「梨泰院クラス」主題歌 World Cover Projectに参加！
「Start (Music from the Original TV Series) [Japanese Version] - Single／Play.Goose」
2021.2.6より配信開始
【Streaming/Download】
https://ingroov.es/start-4u

▷Play.Goose アンサーアルバム「∞ Answers（インフィニティアンサーズ）」
M1 Prelude(inst.)
M2 サケベミライヘ→
M3 Reversi
M4 プロポーズ 2019
M5 Count Up!
M6 Dawn of adventure(inst.)
M7 海賊旗
M8 かくれんぼ
M9 Play this song
2019.10.29 配信開始（全7曲+Instrumental曲）
【Streaming/Download】
https://linkco.re/R7r3Vthx


ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Play.Goose Official information

【Official WEB】https://playgoose.jp/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/playgoosejp
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/playgoosejp/
【アプリケーション「PG @ STANDALONE」】iPhone
：https：//apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383 Android：https：/ /play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー左から▶︎沙夜香（さやか）【Twitter】https://twitter.com/sayaka_0512
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/sayaka_512/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrnu_skz0UhjOkCbqqxJivQ
【注】https://note.com/sayacans▶︎

マナミ（まなみ）【公式WEB】https://manamimushiiiofficial.tumblr.com/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/manamimushiii
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/manamimushiii/
【YouTubeで】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCib6WFved47Ov5hHdZINM5w

aikoさんの「カブトムシ」
男子2人、アコギ１本
シンプルな編成でCoverさせていただきました。

女子がオトコゴコロを、男子がオンナゴコロを学ぶための新企画『Switch Session』がスタート！先陣を切るのは男子によるaikoさんの「カブトムシ」です。ぜひお楽しみください。

▷歌詞字幕付き　※字幕をオンにしてお楽しみください！

aiko- 『カブトムシ』music video
https://youtu.be/wp2U40KI63A

#aiko #カブトムシ #PlayGoose #工藤秀平 #ワタナベシュウヘイ
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【LIVE情報】
2年ぶりのライブツアー【TEST BED #3 STAND NOT ALONE】決定！
Play.Goose 新常態 “1st” LIVE TOUR

【TEST BED #3 STAND NOT ALONE】
9/16（木）＠東京 渋谷duo MUSIC EXCHANGE
9/25（土）＠名古屋ReNY Limited
9/30（木）＠大阪BIG CAT

P.G＠STAND ALONEアプリ内で受付中！
アプリを最新版にしてお申し込み下さい。
iPhone:https://apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383
Android:https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app

新常態のツアーは、オンラインとの"ハイブリッドライブ"となっています。.

※【全公演ドネーション付き生中継配信あり】
視聴方法：P.G＠STAND ALONE内で生中継（固定カメラ + PAミックス音声）
料金：無料
ドネーション：１口1000円から5口まで
ドネーション返礼品：スペシャルポストカード（公演会場での写真付き）
ドネーションページ：https://playgoose.official.ec/

詳細はHPをご覧ください！
https://playgoose.jp/news/1598

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【P.G@STAND ALONE】
Play.Gooseメンバー自らが開発に携わり、新常態でも安心・安全に、ファンとメンバーをつなぐ公式プラットフォームアプリ「P.G＠STAND ALONE」をリリース！「P.G＠STAND ALONE」では、最新の情報やメンバーのSNS情報がまとめて確認できるほか、無料で会員登録を行うと見られる限定コンテンツや、イベントなどとも連動しています。

▷アプリの無料ダウンロードはこちらから
iPhone：https://apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383
Android：https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Play.Gooseチャンネル登録よろしくお願いします！！】
こちらへ→ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCx66obAJ42B0XwHIm_iupkw?sub_confirmation=1
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Release情報】
▷Play.Gooseが日本代表として韓国ドラマ「梨泰院クラス」主題歌 World Cover Projectに参加！
「Start (Music from the Original TV Series) [Japanese Version] - Single／Play.Goose」
2021.2.6より配信開始
【Streaming/Download】
https://ingroov.es/start-4u

▷Play.Goose アンサーアルバム「∞ Answers（インフィニティアンサーズ）」
M1 Prelude(inst.)
M2 サケベミライヘ→
M3 Reversi
M4 プロポーズ 2019
M5 Count Up!
M6 Dawn of adventure(inst.)
M7 海賊旗
M8 かくれんぼ
M9 Play this song
2019.10.29 配信開始（全7曲+Instrumental曲）
【Streaming/Download】
https://linkco.re/R7r3Vthx


ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Play.Goose Official information

【Official WEB】https://playgoose.jp/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/playgoosejp
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/playgoosejp/
【application「P.G@STAND ALONE」】
iPhone：https://apps.apple.com/jp/app/play-goose/id1567804383
Android：https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.playgoose.app

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

【Playing members】
左から
▶︎K.K. 工藤秀平(Shuhei Kudo)
【Official WEB】https://www.kudokimu.com/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/kkshuhei
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/kkshuhei/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNzwP-FmYZjKKXU7dhlKfpQ
【note】https://note.com/kkshuhei

▶︎ワタナベシュウヘイ(Shuhei Watanabe)
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/wasshuu_1101
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/wasshustagram/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6wNAAXoYPMxyBzeID2--8w
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTrCIuZGtbeqt-68haJqeSw

Play.Goose Streaming Liveも再始動！そして、実証実験ライブ結果をもって、2年ぶりのツアーを発表いたしました。このご時世の中、みんなに背中を押してもらえてうれしかったです。医師監修の元、感染対策を徹底した、三大都市ツアーでお会いしましょう！

【TEST BED #3 三大都市ツアー開催決定】
9/16（木）＠東京　渋谷duo MUSIC EXCHANGE
9/25（土）＠名古屋ReNY Limited
9/30（木）＠大阪BIG CAT

※全席距離を確保した指定座席　※ライブハウスの感染対策徹底
※アプリでの事前体調管理　※更に感染対策の強化

自治体の判断によってイベント実施が禁止となった場合、その判断に従いオンラインライブに切り替えます。

チケットは近日受付開始！

【Play.Goose Fes 2020 ついて】
「Play.Goose Fes 2020」につきましては、安全な形で実現できるよう、PG公式プラットフォームアプリ「P.G@STAND ALONE」による体調管理や、それと連動したライブなどにて実施実験を行い、中止ではなく延期という形で、準備を重ねている段階でございます。振替日につきましては、引き続き、政府や地方自治体、さらには業界団体の方針と合わせて検討を続けております。お待たせしており大変申し訳ございませんが、実施を楽しみにお待ちいただければ幸いです。

本公演にご当選された皆様のチケットならびにチケット代金、LivePocket様に管理していただいております。チケットについてご不明点などございましたら、こちらまでお問い合わせをお願いいたします。
https://t.livepocket.jp/help/faq#41

ご当選され、ご入金済みの方はそのまま振替公演にてそのチケットをご利用できます。
また、次回の告知で振替日のご都合が合わない方に払い戻しのご対応をさせていただくことも可能です。

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Play.Gooseチャンネル登録よろしくお願いします！！】
こちらへ→ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCx66obAJ42B0XwHIm_iupkw?sub_confirmation=1
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
【Release情報】
▷Play.Gooseが日本代表として韓国ドラマ「梨泰院クラス」主題歌 World Cover Projectに参加！
「Start (Music from the Original TV Series) [Japanese Version] - Single／Play.Goose」
2021.2.6より配信開始
【Streaming/Download】
https://ingroov.es/start-4u

▷Play.Goose アンサーアルバム「∞ Answers（インフィニティアンサーズ）」
M1 Prelude(inst.)
M2 サケベミライヘ→
M3 Reversi
M4 プロポーズ 2019
M5 Count Up!
M6 Dawn of adventure(inst.)
M7 海賊旗
M8 かくれんぼ
M9 Play this song
2019.10.29 配信開始（全7曲+Instrumental曲）
【Streaming/Download】
https://linkco.re/R7r3Vthx


ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Play.Goose Official information

【Official WEB】https://playgoose.jp/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/playgoosejp
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/playgoosejp/

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

【Playing members】
左から
▶︎沙夜香(Sayaka)
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/sayaka_0512
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/sayaka_512/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrnu_skz0UhjOkCbqqxJivQ
【note】https://note.com/sayacans

▶︎K.K. 工藤秀平(Shuhei Kudo)
【Official WEB】https://www.kudokimu.com/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/kkshuhei
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/kkshuhei/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNzwP-FmYZjKKXU7dhlKfpQ
【note】https://note.com/kkshuhei

▶︎マナミ(Manami)
【Official WEB】https://manamimushiiiofficial.tumblr.com/
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/manamimushiii
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/manamimushiii/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCib6WFved47Ov5hHdZINM5w

▶︎ワタナベシュウヘイ(Shuhei Watanabe)
【Twitter】https://twitter.com/wasshuu_1101
【Instagram】https://www.instagram.com/wasshustagram/
【YouTube】https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6wNAAXoYPMxyBzeID2--8w
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTrCIuZGtbeqt-68haJqeSw