A testator can validly exclude family from a will if they possess testamentary capacity and follow legal requirements, regardless of perceived fairness. Proof of undue influence or incapacity lies with the party challenging the will.

Choong Yeow Choy J:

JUDGEMENT

Introduction

[1]The Sixth Plaintiff’s witness, Koh Chew Ling, a brother of Koh Chew Yoong, the Deceased, made an impassioned plea before this Court, urging that justice be done for his late brother. He implored that due recognition be given to what he believes to be the deceased’s final wishes, as expressed in his last testamentary will. This Court reassures Koh Chew Ling, and all parties directly or indirectly involved in this suit, that its only concern is to determine and give effect to the testamentary intentions of the Deceased, as embodied in the will or wills presently in contention, in accordance with the law.

[2]At its core, the present dispute is one between the siblings of the Deceased on one side, and his nephew-in-law and sister-in- law on the other. Each faction seeks to propound a different will of the Deceased, asserting that the will they rely upon represents his true and final testamentary intention.

The Issues

[3]With the Plaintiff and the First Defendant in the present proceedings propounding a different will, the overriding issue in this suit is whether the impugned 27 June, 2008 Will (“the impugned 2008 Will”) or the impugned 9 March, 2019 Will (“the impugned 2019 Will”) is the “proper, valid and enforceable will”.

[4]In particular, the issues to be tried between the Plaintiff and the First Defendant, as framed in Enclosure 45 are:

1.Whether the Will dated 9 March 2019, propounded by the Plaintiff:

(a)is a forged will;

(b)was not duly prepared and executed in accordance with the Wills Act 1959 ;

(c)is surrounded by suspicious circumstances; and

(d)was prepared without the knowledge and consent of the Deceased.

2.and if the answers to the above questions are in the affirmative:

3.Whether the First Defendant is entitled to claim any damages from the Plaintiff.

[5]On the other hand, the issues to be tried between the Plaintiff and the Second Defendant, as framed in Enclosure 45 are:

1.Whether the Will dated 9 March 2019, propounded by the Plaintiff:

(a)is a forged will;

(b)was not duly prepared and executed in accordance with the Wills Act 1959 ;

(c)is surrounded by suspicious circumstances; and

(d)was prepared without the knowledge and consent of the Deceased.

2.and if the answers to the above questions are in the affirmative:

3.Whether the Second Defendant is entitled to claim any damages from the Plaintiff:

(a)when the Plaintiff trespassed and/or instigated Koh Chew Ling to trespass into the Kuantan house; and

(b)when the Plaintiff removed, retrieved, and retained or instigated Koh Chew Ling to remove, retrieve, and retain documents such as the Second Defendant’s medical records without the Second Defendant’s consent.

Persons Relevant to the Dispute

[6]The Deceased, Koh Chew Yoong, passed away without leaving any parents, spouse or issues.

[7]The Deceased passed away on or about 16 October, 2020 in Kuantan.

[8]The Deceased was predeceased by his parents and his wife, Frances Lee Suan Gaik. Frances Lee Suan Gaik had passed away on or about December, 2007.

[9]Koh Chew Yoong is survived by his 8 siblings, namely:

(i)Koh Ah Hwoi @ Kok Ah Hwoi (Plaintiff);

(ii)Koh Siew Ching @ Ah Ching;

(iii)Ko Siew Kim;

(iv)Koh Chaw Huah;

(v)Koh Siew Hong;

(vi)Koh Chiew Ling @ Koh Chuw Ling;

(vii)Koh Chew Kien; and

(viii)Koh Chew Lak

[10]The Deceased was the third child in the family, and the siblings listed above are his