Steve Shim CJ (Sabah & Sarawak):

The Issues

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.

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

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. He built up his business empire single-handedly, conducting his affairs through private limited companies, partnerships and sole proprietorships. He kept a low profile eschewing publicity. He was a very dominant personality, much in the traditional Chinese style patriarch. His business and family affairs were apparently structured quite like the hierarchical feudal system with him at the apex. He was said to be extremely frugal and tight-fisted with money. He was however a simple man with simple taste, often wearing a singlet and sarong. His wife Ong Kiau passed away in 1985. They had 5 natural children, namely, Gan Kim Toon, Gan Yook Chin, Gan Yook Hwa, Gan Kim Guan and Gan Yoke Mua. The youngest child Gan Sieow Lea was given away by her parents when she was six months old. The deceased and his wife adopted three children, namely, Gan Yan Khean, Lim Lye Huat and Tay Heok Lee. They lived initially at No. 130, Jalan Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Malacca, but in 1972, moved to No. 82, on the same road. In 1993, the deceased suffered a fall. He then had to use a wheel chair. He was taken care of on a daily basis by one Lee Kim Teng who would exercise him and attend to his bathing and toilet needs. After the fall, the deceased seldom attended his office. Instead, he would carry out his business affairs from the family home. He would make decisions there and the staff would visit him at the home. In December 1996, the deceased wanted to make a will. He conveyed this intention to his solicitor Andrew Goh. In fact, an appointment was made by Andrew Goh to visit the deceased for the purpose but the visit did not take place as Andrew Goh had apparently forgotten about the appointment. A few days before Chinese New year 1997, the deceased was said to have dictated in Hokkien to his second son Gan Kim Guan certain names and percentages which were then written down by the latter in two pieces of paper. These were produced at the trial as exhs. D3A and D3B. Subsequently in April 1997, while the deceased was in hospital, Dr. Goh Tiong Peng, the family physician, at the request of some members of the deceased's family, asked him " whether there were any loose ends that he had not tied up. " According to Dr. Goh, the deceased replied in the affirmative. It was about this time that the deceased became seriously sick. He was taken to Gleneagles Hospital in Singapore where he was diagnosed to be suffering from advanced mid-oesophageal carcinoma (a form of cancer). It was terminal. On 8 April 1997, the deceased was admitted to the Ayer Keroh Specialist Centre, Malacca, where he was put under the care of Dr. Goh. He was discharged from that hospital on 11 April 1997, but was re-admitted on 25 April 1997. There he remained until he passed away on 1st May 1997. A few days after h