GAN YOOK CHIN & ANOR vs LEE ING CHIN & ORS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2004 MarsdenLR 308

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
GAN YOOK CHIN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
LEE ING CHIN & ORS – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:CV Das,Goh Siu Lin,Brian Jit Singh ,Respondent Advocate: Cecil Abraham,Tommy Thomas,Robert Lazar,Gopal Sreenevasan,Mark Lau

JUDGMENT

Steve Shim CJ (Sabah & Sarawak):

The Issues

[1] The Federal Court had, on 28 July 2003, granted the appellants leave to appeal on 29 questions. In their memorandum of appeal, the appellants have converted these questions into 29 grounds of appeal. Before us, the appellants counsel has categorised these grounds under 5 specific heads as follows:

(1) The appellate intervention question.
(2) The testamentary capacity question.
(3) The forgery question.
(4) The suspicious circumstances question.
(5) The so-called "Flannery" question.

[2] Counsel on both sides of the divide have focused their submissions under those heads. That makes perfect sense because this appeal can be effectively disposed of on consideration of the issues raised under those specific heads.

The Factual Background

[3] The factual background can be restated briefly. The deceased Gan Puay Chee @ Gan Chuan Lian migrated to this country from China at the tender age of 9. He settled down in Malacca. There he became a very successful businessman. He made his fortune in the agricultural sector He owned rubber and oil palm estates. He also owned substantial properties, both moveable and immoveable, in Singapore and England.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2004 MarsdenLR 308

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYAGAN YOOK CHIN & ANOR – AppellantVersusLEE ING CHIN & ORS – Respondent

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
GAN YOOK CHIN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
LEE ING CHIN & ORS – Respondent