關於 how to maintain family relationships ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【國立臺灣大學 109學年度畢業典禮 貴賓致詞】
Commencement Address, National Taiwan University Commencement 2021

.
巨大集團 羅祥安前執行長
Giant Group Former CEO Anthony Lo

管校長，羅副校長，各位貴賓，畢業生的家長跟朋友們，還有今天最重要的2021年臺大的畢業生，大家早安、大家好！

首先恭喜你們，今天從全世界最優秀大學之一的臺灣大學畢業了！
在過去幾年，在管校長，以「大學教改」和「國際化」的理念，率領全體師生的努力之下，臺大在全世界的能見度，和各項排名，都有顯著的進步，也讓身為校友的我們倍感光榮。

是不是我們大家一起鼓掌，給自己鼓勵一下好不好！

你們今天剛剛畢業，但是你們已經創造了臺大一項新的紀錄：第一次，沒有傳統畢業典禮的畢業生。這將是你們人生一個非常特別的回憶，也預表了你們未來將會有與眾不同的表現，和非凡的成就。

現在的世界，局勢是在東方跟西方的勢力，彼此對抗而動盪不安。而全世界的經濟活動，也因為科技的突破性創新，而受到很大的影響。不盡理想的、不盡公平的全球化，也將逐漸地變成 全球在地化。而COVID-19肆虐全球的結果，使得臺灣跟全世界，大家的生活型態、社會的結構、經濟活動的節奏都被打亂了，而必須要加以全面的整理跟重新的架構。這當然是一個危機，但是更是一個絕好的機會。所以，將你們迎面而來的，是無數的創新的機會，以及冒險卻令人興奮的全新挑戰。

因為臺灣，這是第一次跟全世界各個國家，同步的站在一個嶄新的共同起跑點上面。所以我要恭喜你們，你們躬逢其會，將要進入一個充滿希望、嶄新的時代。

我是1969年從臺大畢業的，所以我想今天就以我畢業之後的50多年，人生的一些學習和體會，來跟諸位分享，給諸位作個參考。

當我大學畢業的時候，我滿懷抱負，迫不及待地想要大展身手，我當時進入臺灣最大的貿易公司工作，但是我發現我所學的很多東西，只有一些國際貿易的實務跟英文有用，至於其他我所學習到的經營管理的很多知識，恐怕都要等到10年、20年之後，如果我有幸當上高級主管才能派上用場。

更諷刺的是，我是商學系畢業的，但是工作兩年後，我發現我真的不喜歡做商人，我也不喜歡做生意，我有興趣的是做事業。

後來，幸好我有聆聽我心裡面的微弱的聲音，決定踏進自行車業，放棄掉台北最好的貿易公司的金飯碗，而去參加在大甲一個只有38個人的小公司，來追求我的夢想。

那時候許多人認為我腦筋有問題，頭殼壞去，但現在回顧回來，我當時是做了人生一個非常好的決定。

創業的過程飽受艱辛，但是我也學到了很多寶貴的經驗：我首先學到的，是在做事之前，必須要先學做人。

人必須要誠信踏實，不能自私自利，而要利他共好。

要隨時心存感恩，尊重、關切別人。要熱愛這個世界，並且要了解到一個人的能力是有限的，而必須要去建立互信、互助的人際關係；要融入群體、要發揮團隊的精神。

在做事方面，一定要以正面積極的態度，認真努力去工作。 而且不要怕失敗，要勇於接受新的挑戰。因為如果有失敗了，那只是代表說你又更靠近成功一步了。要作中學，學中作，要虛心好奇的終身學習，開拓挑戰、追求卓越。

在這裡，我想要送給大家一個很特別的畢業禮物，就是兩個「成功的錦囊」。
第一個錦囊：不管你做什麼工作，不論你職務的高低，永遠都要站在顧客的立場，來為他們設想，還能做什麼，讓他們能夠得到更多的創新價值。

第二個錦囊：無論作什麼工作，不管你職務的高低，永遠都要站在經營者的角度來為公司設想，要做什麼，才能讓公司更健康，永續經營跟發展。

既使你們把我後面講的很多東西都忘記了，沒關係，但是這個畢業禮物你們一定要記得帶回去，因為這些「同理心」的兩個錦囊，在未來會給你們帶來意想不到的祝福！

其次我體會到，名跟利都是副產品。正產品是你成為什麼樣的人，成就什麼樣的事。當正產品是對的時候，名跟利都自然會來。

所以我鼓勵大家在找工作的時候，不要太計較開始的薪水和待遇。因為事實上，一個新人，在前面三年是很難有大的貢獻的，反過來只是公司發薪水來給你培訓而已。所以選擇一個有意義的行業，找一家你可以學習進步的好公司，這才是重要的。

第三，我學習到 知識不等於智慧。諸位都學有專精，有很多寶貴的知識，但這些知識必須要實際去做才能夠產生經驗，而累積的時候會有不同經驗的反省、學習、跟體會，尤其是從那些失敗的經 驗，才能夠漸漸地凝結成有用的智慧。
我的成長過程分成三段，開始我是一個「I」型的人，我擁有一些經營管理的基本的能力。後來因為工作的需要和我的好奇心，我漸漸地學習到技術開發、製造生產、品牌推廣、全球經營、以及行銷、服務等等寶貴的經驗，這樣漸漸地，我就形成一個「T」型的一個跨界的人才。但是到了我真正找到公司未來的使命跟方向，並且把它跟我的人生目標結合在一起，熱情的、積極去推動的時候，那時候我終於成為一個「十字架」型的一個領導者。

當公司發展得比較穩定之後，我就面臨要如何來替公司規劃願景、使命、定位，跟長期策略。在這個階段，我有一些新的體會：首先，你必須要能夠畫出一個「黃金正三角形」，正三角形是最穩定的，上面是戰略，中間是戰術，下面是戰鬥。先要有正確的戰略，才能衍伸出有效的戰術，再根據這個戰術去貫徹戰鬥的執行。換言之，戰略就是做對的事情，戰術就是對的方法，戰鬥就是用對的方法去把事情做對做好，並且不斷地去持續改善。

想要能夠思考出長期的戰略，就必須要有洞察力。

我很喜歡看地球儀，就是那種在一個架子上面，有一個可以轉動的地球模型。當你把地球轉動的時候，你看到上面每一個地方、每一個國家，它的地理位置、它的自然生態，以及你思考它的歷史的演變跟它的發展，這樣子你就能夠得出一個整體的，跟全方位的一個概念。

在思考長期戰略的時候，很不容易得出一個有突破性的一個創見，它的原因往往是因為「當局者迷」的關係。

所以當我考慮長期戰略的時候，我會把自己設想，好像從一個人造衛星上面，來觀看一個轉動的地球。以宇宙格局的高度，以全球視野的廣度，以歷史演進的長度，這樣子你就能夠以一個「旁觀者清」的姿態和角度，來正面、反面深入思考，這樣子你就可能得到一個突破性的一個解答。「世界的捷安特」跟「全球在地化」的品牌經營—這樣子的策略、願景就是這樣產生的。

另外一種洞察力，是如何推出給人們有創新價值的產品跟服務。這就要時時地站在人文跟科技的十字路口，仔細觀察它們的變化，然後活用科技的進步，為人文潛在的需求，適時地提供最佳的解決方案。捷安特的Cycling世界，就是用這種方法，不斷的推出創新價值的產品。

我們在經營上也有發展出一個特別的理念，那就是「不求第一，要作惟一」。全世界的人這麼多，但沒有兩個人的指紋是一樣的， 所以每一個人都是獨一無二、都是惟一的。可見當上帝造每一個人的時候，祂都有衪特別的計劃，而且也把成功所需要的能力跟要素，已經放在你的心中，等待你取用。所以每一個人不應該只是模仿別人，或者是按照別人的期望來生活，而應該要找出並且發揮自己的天賦，真正做自己，成為惟一，才能夠活出精采的生命。

企業也是一樣，不能隨波逐流，必須要找出什麼才是對的，什麼是合適你的，什麼才是有意義、對這個世界有貢獻的，這個才是惟一。當你精益求精，努力的想要成為惟一的時侯，你才能夠找到真正正確的目標，以及永續生存的價值。如果事事都想為第一，那麼你可能去追求很多不切實際的目標，而被你無法承受的巨大壓力所摧毀。或者，因為不擇手段，最後走上一些錯誤的道路。
在長期追求惟一的過程當中，我也得到兩個重要的體會：當你決心做一件對的事情，而且不屈不撓，勇敢堅持奮鬥的時候，全宇宙的力量都會起來幫助你。另外，把一件有意義的事情，用生命的力量把它作好，你就有可能改變這個世界！

我鼓勵你們，聆聽你們內心深處的微小的聲音，讓它引導你們，去尋找到你們的天賦，了解你們的命定。

不求第一，要作惟一。做你真正的自己，成為惟一。活出你精彩的生命，享受你幸福的人生！

很多人說，生長在臺灣的人，一輩子裡面一定要完成三項挑戰：登玉山、泳渡日月潭、還有騎自行車環島。我覺得這非常有道理。所以我建議大家在畢業以後，在去當兵、就業之前，不妨參加一個自行車環島的旅行團，用九天的時間，仔細的去體會、欣賞寶島臺灣的美好，用自行車的輪胎去親吻，這塊生你長你的美麗大地，就當作是送給你自己的一個畢業禮物吧！

那教授們跟家長們，可能會想說，啊！太可惜了，我畢業的時候沒有騎自行車環島，我現在已經五六十歲了。沒關係，你這個年紀正好來從事人生的壯遊。
我們臺大的校長－管校長，在今年的一月份，就勇敢的完成他夢寐以求的自行車環島的壯遊。我們給管爺一個掌聲好不好？

有人認為臺灣很小、沒有前途，真的是這樣嗎？世界經濟論壇每年都要把全世界的國家的實力做一個調查跟排名。讓我們來看一下臺灣的排名。全世界有235個國家，就面積來講，我們排名第137；就人口來講，第57；就經濟體來講，第21；就整體競爭力來講，排名第11；而創新力，臺灣排名第4。沒錯，臺灣的確不大，但是我們很強，我們可以很有前途！

可預見的，未來的世界將會成為美、歐、亞三區鼎力的這個新局面。就像三個圓圈，各自都以自己的利益為優先，並且彼此長期的競爭、對抗和抵制，但是同時又不得不相互的維持一些必要的連結。而在每一個圈裡面，它將持續的有很多劇烈的改變，就像一個暴風圈一樣。而這三個暴風圈連結在一起，就形成一個所謂完全風暴PERFECT STORM。

最近經濟學人雜誌，把臺灣當作封面，稱臺灣為地球上最危險的地方，但同時又是科技業最關鍵的地方。我個人倒認為，未來臺灣可能是處在一個最有利的地位，就在那三個暴風圈中間的那個颱風眼，也就是這三個圈圈彼此連結交會的中心點。這個地方看起來好像危險，其實是最安全、最有利、又是最關鍵的地方。

當三個暴風圈無可避免的，參與在一個長期的競爭、對抗、跟抵制－這樣一個零和的賽局裡面。那臺灣並不屬於任何一個圈圈，也不需要去參與這些競爭、對抗跟抵制。而可以去想說，我可以在這個關鍵的中心點，替這個世界來提供什麼樣子的創新價值的貢獻。

臺灣過去50年的努力累積了很多技術開發、製造管理、金融資本，社會資源，以及民主法治體制，這些稀有而寶貴的實力。而且如果以全世界作為舞台，那麼，能夠精通中文跟英文、能夠深切的了解東方西方的文化；有專業，又能跨界，謙卑而不自卑，自信而不自大的臺灣人，可能是全世界最優秀的人才。

未來無法被預測，但是可以被創造！30年前，有誰能夠預測到說臺灣會產生世界級的台積電跟捷安特？

台積電秉持著作惟一的理念，以全球晶圓代工的戰略，厚植實力，打造了優質高效的供應鏈，把臺灣變成一個科技島。以臺灣為核心，轉動引領全世界的半導體市場。

捷安特也秉持著作惟一的理念，以世界的捷安特，全球在地化的品牌戰略，帶領A-Team把臺灣變成全世界高級車的中心，又積極的推動Cycling的新文化，把臺灣發展成一個自行車島，以臺灣為核心，轉動引領全世界自行車的市場。
在這裡我也期許我們臺大，也能夠以作惟一這樣子的理念，轉動引領世界，變成全世界最優秀人才培養的最佳搖籃。

未來的50年，臺灣將迎來前所未有最大的機運！所以臺灣是不是應該要脫離過去單純競爭的心態，而來積極的謀求長期的未來生存之道，或者更進一步要問自己：臺灣可以為世界貢獻些什麼？臺灣不應該只是消極的「根留臺灣」，而應該更主動積極的「放眼全球、立足亞太、深根臺灣」。

臺灣過去的50年，那是一個非常艱辛跟特別的階段。很慶幸的，臺灣在那個階段裡面，是屬於勝利的這一組。

現在是應該到了必須要了解過去、深入現在、策劃未來，這個重要關鍵的時刻。要如何的以宇宙格局的高度、以全球視野的廣度、以及歷史演進的長度，衡外情，量己力，來為臺灣重新的定位，重新畫一個正確的戰略、戰術、戰鬥的黃金三角形。讓臺灣能夠真正發揮自己的長處，能夠打造創新價值的優勢，成為惟一、做Only One！要能夠創造一個更安全、更廣闊、更興盛－全新的藍海。臺灣必須要成為世界的好公民，繼續的為全世界做更多、更好的貢獻！
2021的畢業生們，在你們當中有未來國家的領導人、有全球企業的創造者、有在社會各行各業、方方面面的核心人才，所以臺灣未來50年的未來，就掌握在你們手中了。

最後，我想用一位著名科學家的名言來作結尾： Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving. 人生就像騎自行車，要保持你平衡最好的方法，就是繼續不斷地向前進。

你知道這是誰的名言嗎？ 沒錯，就是愛因斯坦！

2021的畢業生們，請你騎上你人生的自行車，勇敢的向前邁進，去開創你獨一無二、精彩無比的新生命跟未來。再一次，恭喜你們，並且祝福你們每一位，將來都能夠有健康、幸福、精彩跟有意義的人生！
謝謝！

.
==============================

.
President Kuan, Executive Vice President Luo, Distinguished guests, family, friends, and most importantly, the graduating class of 2021, good morning!

First of all, congratulations! Today, you are graduating from one of the best universities in the world – National Taiwan University!

Over the last few years, President Kuan led the university forward with his vision of “educational reform” and internationalization”. Together with all the faculty and students, NTU has made significant progress in both ranking and global visibility, making us, alumni, extremely proud.

I think we deserve to give ourselves a round of applause!

You are the graduating class of 2021 and already, you have set a new record for NTU: For the first time, there will not be a traditional graduation ceremony. Let this be a very special memory of your life and a sign of the difference you will make in your future with extraordinary achievements.

The world is now in a volatile state where the East and the West are confronting each other. The world’s economic activities are also greatly affected by the breakthrough and innovations in technology. The less-than-ideal and less-than fair globalization will gradually become global localization. And as a result of COVID-19, Taiwan and the rest of the world’s lifestyle, social structure, and economy have been disrupted, and must be comprehensively reorganized and restructured. This is certainly a crisis, but in the midst of every crisis, lies great opportunity. So, what lies before you are countless opportunities for innovation, and exciting new challenges.

Because, for the first time, Taiwan is standing with the rest of the world on a new race-track. Therefore, I would like to congratulate you, you are entering a new era full of hope.

I graduated from NTU in 1969. It has been more than 50 years and today, I would like to share some of my life experiences and insights.

When I graduated from college, I was filled with ambition. I couldn’t wait to make my mark. I joined one of the largest trading companies in Taiwan, where I quickly realized the only materials I learned in school that came in handy are a little bit of international trade practices and English. Much of what I had learned about business management would only be relevant 10 or 20 years down the road, if I was lucky enough to become a senior executive.

What’s even more ironic is that I graduated with a degree in business, but after working for 2 years, I realize I really don’t like being a businessman, and I don’t like doing business. What I am actually interested in is building an enterprise.

Fortunately, I chose to listen to the faint voice in my heart and decided to enter the bicycle industry. I left my position at the best trading company in Taipei to join a small company with only 38 employees in Dajia to pursue my dream.

At the time, many people thought I must’ve broken my skull and gone crazy, but looking back, I have made a great decision in my life.

The process of starting my own enterprise has been very difficult, but I have learned many valuable lessons. The first thing I learned is that before you can do anything else, you have to learn to be a person of good character.

We must be honest, down to earth, selfless, self-serving, and altruistic for the common good.

Be grateful, respectful and caring at all times. To love the world and to understand that one person’s ability is limited and that is necessary to build interpersonal relationships of mutual trust and support; to be part of a group and to play as a team.

When it comes to work, you must work hard with a positive attitude. And don’t be afraid to fail, be brave enough to accept new challenges. Because every time you fail, it just means you are one step closer to success. Learning is an active process. We learn by doing. We must stay open-minded and curious, aspiring to lifelong learning; to explore challenges and pursue excellence.

Here I would like to give everyone a special graduation gift, which are my two tips for success:
First, always put yourself in the customer’s shoes, regardless of what you’re doing or what kind of job title you hold. Think for them, think about what else you can do to create more value for the customers.

Second, regardless of what you’re doing or what kind of job title you hold, always think about the company from the proprietor’s point of view; what can we do to build a healthier company that’s sustainable.

Even if you are going to forget everything I say later, that’ ok. Just remember to take your graduation gift at heart, because these two tips on “empathy “are sure to bring you unexpected blessings in the future!

Later on, I realized that fame and money are merely byproducts. The real product is you, what kind of person you have become and what have you achieved. When the real product is identified, fame and money will come naturally.

So I encourage you, when you look for a job, don’t be too concerned about the starting salary and benefits. Because as a matter of fact, as a newcomer, it is very difficult to make a big contribution in the first three years, so really the company is paying to give you training instead. So choose a meaningful industry and find a good company where you can improve and grow, that’s what’s important.

Thirdly, I learned that knowledge is not the same as wisdom. All of you have learned a lot and have a lot of valuable knowledge, but this knowledge must be practiced in order to produce experience, and in the process of accumulation, there will be different experiences of reflection, learning and empathy, especially from failure, slowly and surely all these experiences will be condensed into useful wisdom.

My personal development can be divided into three stages. I began as a I-shaped person with some basic skills in business management. Later on, due to my job and curiosity, I gained respected experience in technology development, manufacturing, branding, global marketing, and service and thus gradually becoming a T-shape multidisciplinary professional.

However, when I combined the future mission and direction of the company with my life goals, promoting it enthusiastically and actively, that is when I finally became a X-shape transdisciplinary leader.

Once the company became more stable, I was faced with the challenge of planning the vision, mission, positioning, and long-term strategy for the company. At this stage, I had some new insights.

First, you must be able to draw a “golden triangle”, an equilateral triangle is the most stable shape with strategy on top, tactics in the middle, and operations at the bottom. In other words, the strategy is to do the right thing, the tactics is the using the right methods, and operations is using the right methods to excel on doing the right things while constantly improving them.

To develop long-term strategies, it is necessary to have insight.

I enjoy looking at the globe, yes, the spherical model of Earth that sits on a stand and can be rotated. When you rotate the globe, you can see every place and country on it, its geographical location, its natural ecology, and you can think about its historical evolution and development, so that you can come up with an overall comprehensive concept.

When thinking about long-term strategy, it is not easy to come up with a groundbreaking idea, because “men are often blind in their own cause”

Therefore, when I think about long-term strategy, I imagine myself as if I were looking at a rotating Earth from a man-made satellite. With the height of the universe, the breadth of global vision and the length of historical evolution, you will be able think about it from the perspective of an observer, and then you may have a breakthrough. This is how the strategy and vision of “GIANT for the World” and “glocalization” brand management came about.

Another kind of insight is how to introduce the products and services to create additional value to people. This requires standing at the crossroads of humanity and technology, observing their changes carefully, and then using technological advances to provide the best solutions for the potential needs of humanity in a timely manner. This is how GIANT’s Cycling World continues to introduce innovative values to its products.

We have also developed a special philosophy in our business, which is “don’t be the first one, be the only one”. There are so many people in the world, but no two people share the same fingerprints, making each person unique and one of a kind. God created each person with purpose and has gifted us with the abilities and elements needed for success. All of which is in your heart, waiting for you to take them. Therefore, we should not just follow each other’s footstep or live under the expectations of someone else. Instead, we should find and give reigns to our talents, to truly be ourselves, to become the only one and live a brilliant life.

The same applies to businesses, you can’t just go with the flow, we must find what is right and suitable and what is meaningful and contributive to the world, this is what it means to be the only one. When you strive for excellence and strive to be the only one, you will find the right goals and the value of sustainability. If you try to be first in everything, you may pursue many unrealistic goals and either be destroyed by unbearable pressure or resort to doing whatever it takes, and end up on the wrong path.

I have learned two important lessons in my long quest to be the “only one”. When you are determined to do the right thing and you are unyielding and persistent in your struggle, the power of the universe will rise up and help you. In addition, if you do something meaningful and do it well with the power of life, you may change the world.

I urge you to listen to the small voice deep within you and let it guide you to find your talents and understand your destiny.

Do not seek to be the first but to be the only. Be true to yourself and be the only one. Live your life to the fullest and enjoy your life to the fullest!

Many people say that growing up in Taiwan, you must complete three challenges in your lifetime: climb to the top of Jade Mountain, swim across Sun Moon Lake, and ride a bike around the island. I think this is very true. Therefore, I suggest that after graduation, before you go to the military or get a job, you might as well join a bicycle tour around the island and spend nine days to carefully experience and appreciate the beauty of Taiwan. As a graduation gift to yourself, let the tires kiss the beautiful land where you were born and raised.

All the professors and parents must be thinking in regret, “Ah! Too bad! I didn’t ride my bike around the island when I graduated and now I’m already in my 50s and 60s…” But that’s okay! You are actually at the perfect age to start your adventurous life.

Our President of NTU, President Kuan bravely completed his dream bike tour around the island in January this year. Let’s give President Kuan a round of applause!

Some people think that Taiwan is small and has no future. Every year, the World Economic Forum conducts a survey and ranking of the strength of countries around the world. Let’s take a look at Taiwan’s ranking. There are 235 countries in the world and we rank 137th in terms of landmass, 57th in terms of population, 21st in terms of economy, 11th in terms of overall competitiveness, and 4th in terms of innovation. It’s true that Taiwan is not big, but we are strong and we have a promising future.

In the foreseeable future there will become a new situation in which the United States, Europe and Asia will be the three focal regions. Just like three circles, each of which prioritizes its own interests and is in long-term competition, confrontation and resistance, but at the same time has to maintain some necessary links with each other. And in each circle, drastic changes will be endless, just like a storm circle. These three storm circles are linked together to form a so-called PERFECT STORM.

The Economist magazine recently featured Taiwan on its cover, calling it the most dangerous place on earth, but at the same time the most critical place for the technology industry. Personally, I think that Taiwan may be in the most favorable position in the future, right in the middle of the three storm circles, the eye of the typhoon, which is the center point where these three circles are connected. This place seems dangerous, but in fact it is the safest, most favorable, and most critical place.

When the three storm circles are inevitably involved in a long-term competition, confrontation, and boycott - a zero-sum game. Taiwan does not belong to any of these circles, nor does it need to participate in these competitions, confrontations, and boycotts. Instead, situated in this critical position, I should begin to think about what kind of innovative value I can provide to the world.

Taiwan's efforts over the past 50 years have accumulated many rare and valuable strengths in technology development, manufacturing management, financial capital, social resources, and the democratic rule of law system. If the world is our stage, Taiwanese people who are proficient in Chinese and English, who have a deep understanding of Eastern and Western cultures, who are professional, who can cross borders, who are humble but not inferior, and who are confident but not arrogant, may be the best talents in the world.

The future cannot be predicted, but it can be created! 30 years ago, who could have predicted that Taiwan would produce globally renowned TSMC and GIANT?
TSMC is committed to the concept of being the only one, and has built up its strengths with its global foundry strategy, creating a high-quality and efficient supply chain and turning Taiwan into a technology island. With Taiwan as the core, TSMC is leading the worldwide semiconductor market.

GIANT also upholds the concept of "Be the only one" and leads the A-Team to turn Taiwan into the center of the world's premium bikes with the brand strategy of globalization and localization, and actively promotes the new culture of cycling, developing Taiwan into a cycling island and leading the world's cycling market with Taiwan as the core.

Here I also hope that we, NTU, can also lead the world with the concept of being the only one, and become the best cradle for the cultivation of the best talents in the world.

In the next 50 years, Taiwan will have the greatest opportunity ever! Therefore, Taiwan should get rid of the simple competitive mentality of the past and actively seek the long-term survival of the future, or go even further and ask itself: What can Taiwan contribute to the world? Taiwan should not just "secure Taiwan" in a conservative way, but should be more proactive with global outlook and establish a foothold in the Asia Pacific.

The last 50 years, for Taiwan, has been very difficult and significant. Fortunately, Taiwan pulled through and came out as one of the winners.

Now is the crucial moment to understand the past, delve into the present, and plan for the future. We must take the height of the universe, the breadth of our global vision, and the length of historical evolution, weigh the external situation, and measure our own strengths to reposition Taiwan and draw the golden triangle of strategy, tactics, and operations. Taiwan should be able to give full play to its strengths, create innovative value, and become the only one! Taiwan must become a good citizen of the world and continue to make more and better contributions to the world!

Graduates of 2021, among you are the future leaders of the country, the creators of global enterprises, and the core talents in all walks of life, the future is in your hands.
Finally, I would like to conclude with a quote from a famous scientist: Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.

Do you know who this quote belongs to? That's right, Einstein!

Graduates of 2021, please get ready for your life adventure, get on your bikes and peddle courageously forward to create your own unique and exciting future. Again, congratulations and best wishes to each and every one of you for a healthy, happy, and meaningful life!

Thank you!

詳見：
https://www.facebook.com/NTUCommencement/posts/2718162161807541

.
#臺灣大學 #畢業典禮 #NTUCommencement2021 #貴賓致詞 #羅祥安

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”

Interview with A Founder: Conor McLaughlin (Co-founder of 99.co)

By David Wu (AppWorks Associate)

Conor McLaughlin was previously the Co-founder and CTO of 99.co, the real estate marketplace in Singapore and Indonesia. He spent six and a half years at the startup, whose backers include Sequoia Capital, 500 Startups, and Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin, helping to grow it into a $100 million company. As a member of AppWorks Accelerator #21, he is currently working on his next big project, a yet-to-be-named language learning startup.

【What advice do you have for first-time founders?】

First, you need to decide: do I want to run a sprint or a marathon? For a sprint, you may be open to acquisition from the beginning, delay non-startup aspects of your life, give yourself two years where you drop everything to test an idea, choose to raise more money earlier on and thus be more diluted, or do anything else that implies a shorter time horizon. Typically 1-5 years - this can lead to a major boon in a short period of time if executed well. If you decide you are in the sprinting business, you will most likely be pushed toward binary outcomes because of how many investors and employees you have on your cap table. As a first-time founder, you need to be clear with yourself on what you are willing to put on the line. As Reid Hoffman says, it’s like jumping off a cliff and building a plane on the way down… hopefully you build a plane in time.

If you are running a marathon, you are deciding that your competitive advantage is consistency over intensity. You are in this for 10, 15 years. With this time horizon, you will realize you need ways to metabolize stress and maintain emotional, spiritual, and mental health. You need to maintain relationships with friends, family, and romantic partners. When you are looking at this 10 year period, you realize the people around you can only put up with so much. Unfortunately, while work is something people can generally bounce back from, there are many things in life where you cannot - an example is your relationship with your partner. If you’re going to run a marathon, you need to be clear with yourself about what time you have for other aspects of your life and what time you have for your company. Eventually you need to learn what the right speed is where you can run as long as possible. It’s amazing how often it is that those people that keep going, assuming you have chosen the right problem to solve, eventually find daylight. Part of that is just lasting long enough.

Second, you need to revisit and continually ask yourself: should I still be running a sprint or a marathon? Circumstances change. Maybe you sprinted for the first two years to secure interesting results and funding; now it's time to transition to a marathon and clean up the life debt a bit. Or inversely, maybe you're finally leaving the trough of sorrow and it's time to sprint for a bit. Most founders will be in a long distance race with periodic sprinting. From my observation, founders most often stop because of two reasons: They either A) run out of money or B) run out of energy. There’s plenty of advice out there for scenario A (hint: don’t). But in my experience, scenario B is far more pernicious and dangerous to would-be successful founders. If you are in a marathon but fail to pace yourself and run it like one long sprint, you are unlikely to make it to the end.

Much founder advice speaks to this: Don’t let your startup make you fat. Exercise 5-10% of the time. Pick up a hobby outside of your startup. Go home for holidays. All of it leads back to one thing: You need to take care of yourself. Because injury will be far worse for your progress than being a little slower. “Slow is smooth, smooth is fast”, as the US Navy Seals say. This is surprisingly difficult advice for intrinsically motivated founders to follow, because in the event of failure, it makes them vulnerable to the thought, “Well, you didn’t work hard enough.” But for those that already have the hustle, your job is to avoid the moment of epiphany where you look in the mirror and think, “This isn’t worth it.”

All founders will have to sacrifice some things. The point is to not sacrifice everything. It will make you more resilient. Not less. It will give you the space to see situations more objectively and make better decisions. And most importantly, it will let you love what you do because it will remind you that the work isn’t just in service of yourself, it’s in the service of others. I do not think you can judge hard work over a day, or even a year, but I do think you can judge hard work over 5-10 years. Hard work is not just about the next 1-2 months. There will be times when you need to run as fast as possible, but if that is happening all the time you are probably not being smart about the situation. So don’t hurt yourself, be consistent, keep disciplined, and keep going.

Lastly, focus on your metaskills. Public speaking, reading, writing - skills applied in every aspect of your life. Generally what they reflect is learning how to think better. As a founder you need to think about - how can I think more clearly, be more creative, rigorous, analytical? As Warren Buffett and others have said: I have never seen a successful person that did not read as often as they could. Actual books and long form scare a lot of people. That’s your competitive advantage. Read blog posts from smart people, follow smart people on Twitter, listen to podcasts. Always be focused on how you can develop yourself to think better. Fostering the habit of improving your thinking will foster discipline in yourself. And discipline will let you turn that rigorous thinking into action.

【I imagine running the “race” has been especially tough this year. How have you gotten through 2020?】

I have leaned on routine and community. I’ve spent a lot of time trying to foster discipline in myself. I make my bed every morning, meditate every morning, make sure that I go to the gym 3-4 times a week. There’s so much uncertainty in both the world and the entrepreneurial space. Keeping certain things consistent gives me a spine to my life that I can fall back on. If I’m not feeling well, my discipline takes over and I’ll go to the gym. That helps me relieve stress - falling back to routine and having some mainstays of consistency and structure.

And community - it’s been the big mental health zeitgeist of this year. Everyone is recognizing that without the people around us, our mental health diminishes. Joining AppWorks was very intentional so I could surround myself with like-minded people who could question me, hold me accountable, and inspire me. And also just forming personal connections where I felt that I was still taking care of my mental health by connecting with others. Being a founder is an incredibly lonely journey. In the early days, there’s not a lot of people around. Later, when you do hire lots of people, you need to be the boss, the leader - for certain things, you can’t tell the employees everything, and even if you do, there will always be a bit of distance. You need people to relate to - people want to be seen for who they are, and appreciated for what they give. When you are a founder, sometimes it’s hard to feel that you are seen. So I intentionally put myself in situations where I can be inspired, be held accountable, and more importantly connect with others, and feel that I’m not alone. And that me and my co-founders are part of a communal journey with those around us.

【When you talk about how to run the race, I get the sense that you’re drawing from previous experiences and, perhaps, mistakes. What are the mistakes you’ve made in your founder journey and the takeaways?】

I think you could take a calendar, point to a random week, and we could list out all the mistakes from that week (laughs). I do subscribe to Steve Jobs’ philosophy: mistakes will happen, but mistakes happening means we are making decisions. Not making decisions is perhaps the biggest mistake. It’s often the reason for frustration, loss of speed, loss of momentum - so many of the issues you encounter in startups. Not making enough mistakes is probably the #1 mistake that I’ve made.

Second, going back to my advice to first-time founders, is not understanding what game I’m playing. Not understanding that all the money in the world is not going to be worth it if your spouse or partner decides to leave you because you have relegated them to a second-class citizen in your life. I think I forgot that at points. There is more to life than just the company.

Third, be careful about who you choose to work with. At minimum, if you’re doing a standard 8-9 hours at the office five times a week, that’s a lot of time with those people. You want to like the people that you work with - you want to know they’re high integrity, you want to respect their values, and you want to have common values. Choosing the right people that give you energy rather than take it away just makes running the marathon so much easier.

【We welcome all AI, Blockchain, or Southeast Asia founders to join AppWorks Accelerator: https://bit.ly/3r4lLR8 】