Back
Next 
2018 MarsdenLR 887
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
ONG ENG HOCK & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
ONG CHENG GUAN & ANOR – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: 02(f)-104-11-2016(J)]
Petitioner Advocates:Cyrus Das,Joshua Kevin,Azura Adnan,Savreena Kaur ,Respondent Advocate: Rosli Kamaruddin,Muhammad Naufal Amran,Muhammad Fahmi Jamil,Khairulazwad Sariman
In a probate revocation, the burden to prove sufficient cause lies with the challenger after probate has been granted.
Headnote:This judgment concerns a probate appeal involving the determination of a will's validity. The trial Court found substantial evidence supporting the genuineness of the will executed by the deceased, with defined standards of proof crucial to determining if it was forged. The main issues framed included the burden of proof in revocation actions and whether forgery was established. Upon examination, the Court concluded that sufficient cause for revocation of probate was not established, thus reversing the previous appellate decision.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. unanimous decision allowed the appeal and restored the trial court's findings. (Para 1) |
[1] On 27 July 2017, we heard and unanimously allowed this appeal. We set aside the order of the Court of Appeal dated 19 February 2016 and restored the order of the trial Court dated 7 January 2013. We now give our reasons.
