Sir Charles Murray-Aynsley (Singapore) CJ:

In this case appellant had claimed to be a tsip of the deceased. At the hearing the learned Judge found that she was not. The appeal raised questions of law and fact. In his judgment the learned Judge cited and relied upon the judgment of Terrell J, in the case of Re Lee Choon Guan, decd [1935] MLJ 78. It was contended that this judgment was erroneous in that it decided that recognition by the family of the alleged husband was not merely evidentiary but essential to the validity of a secondary marriage. It is true that the perusal of the judgment might give that impression, but I do not think that the learned Judge acted on that assumption. In the present case there was admittedly no such recognition but the learned Judge did not base his decision merely on that ground but on the evidence generally. I do not think, therefore, that the judgment was based upon an erroneous view of the law.

Objection was also taken to a quotation, referred to with approval, from a judgment of Carey J, in the case of Tan Ah Bee v. Foo Koon Thye [1947] MLJ 169, which reads as follows:

When one appreciates that a secondary wife may be acquired with so