Jeffrey Tan J

Introduction

This has been a trial of some proportions. Sixty seven days were invested recording and hearing evidence and submissions. A catalogue of facts were asserted, a host of issues was raised, literally thousands of folios of documents were produced (see bundles of documents marked PB1, PB2, PB3 and PB4 by the plaintiff, DB1[A]–DB1[F] by the first to third defendants and DB2[A] and DB2[B] by the fourth and fifth defendants) and more than 750 pp of typed notes were recorded. Yet, these proceedings would have been longer even still if not for the agreement of the parties, thankfully, to dispense with all formal proof (save where expressly required, and there were few) of all documents in the bundles of documents and to agree to certain facts (see bundle of all agreed facts).

It has to do with a family dispute on the last will or intestacy, and related issues, of Khaw Bian Cheng (the deceased), the progenitor of the plaintiffs and defendants, and the considerable fortune he left or should have left. The disputes, claims and related issues will be related in the course of this grounds. However, to set the scene,

(i) claiming that the three wills dated 3 August 1992 were forged by the first, second and third defendants and or procured by fraud and undue influence, the plaintiffs propounded three wills dated 24 October 1990 ('1990 wills') as the last will of the deceased,

(ii) denying any forgery, the first, second and third defendants propounded three wills dated 3 August 1992 ('1992 wills') as the last will of the deceased, whilst,

(iii) the fourth and fifth defendants, claiming there are no true wills, propounded the intestacy of the deceased.

The plaintiffs claimed as well for the return or restitution of substantial sums, several cars, jewellery and a piece of land that the first to third defendants allegedly extruded and peculated in the last year of the deceased's life, for the removal of the first, second and third defendants as executors and trustees and for the forfeiture of their beneficial interests under the 1990 or 1992 wills.

Eclectic, the evidence ranged from the genealogy and early years, the properties in Malaysia, Thailand and the United States ('US'), the character and lifestyle, the children and grandchildren, the trials and tribulations with progeny, the bequests, the many 'wills and codicils', the 'settlements and gifts' and dealings of the deceased.

Witnesses

Twenty three witnesses testified at the trial; 12 were summoned by the plaintiffs, eight by the first to third defendants and three by the fourth and fifth defendants. Trial commenced on 22 October 1996 and ended on 25 March 1998.

Testifying for the plaintiffs were Khaw Cheng Bok (PW5), Khaw Cheng Liat (PW9), Hamid Merican (PW1 — a businessman/estate agent and friend of the family), Dr Abdul Gafoor (PW2 — an orthopaedic surgeon), Teoh Say Bee (PW3 — an employee of the deceased for 50 years), Teh Beng Tatt (PW4 — the deceased's accounts clerk for 12 years), Dr Tan Chee Khuan (PW6 — a consultant psychiatrist at Lam Wah Ee Hospital, Penang — 'LWE Hospital'), Dr Francis Tan Seow Kee (PW7 — a consultant physician at LWE Hospital), Teoh Seng Chye (PW8 — the Deputy Branch Manager of Bank Bumiputra (M) Bhd Pulau Tikus Branch — 'BBMB'), Chew Cheng Leong (PW10 — the manager of Arthur Andersen & Co of Kuala Lumpur), Nik Saghir bin Nik Ismail (PW11 — a senior partner of Messrs Nik Saghir & Ismail, Advocates & Solicitors of Kuala Lumpur) and Ghazi bin Ishak (PW12 — a senior partner of Messrs Ghazi & Lim, Advocates & Solicitors of Penang and a witness to the 1990 wills).

Testifying for the first to third defendants were Howard Khaw Teik Chong (DW4), Richard Khaw Teik Ewe (DW5), Lim Cheng Chuan (DW1 — a senior lawyer and a witness to the 1992 wills), Yeoh Keat Chye (DW2 — the driver of the deceased), Tan Beng Hin (DW3 — a broker), Lim Bock Eng (DW6 — Khaw Cheng Poon's wife), ML Isdakorn Kasemsri (DW7 — a lawyer from Bangkok, Thailand) and Cho Choo