JUDGMENT

Steve Shim CJ (Sabah & Sarawak):

On 21 June 2004, the Federal Court granted the appellant leave to appeal on the following questions:

1. Should the standard of proof in civil cases for "forgery" as expressed to be on a balance of probabilities in the decision of the Federal Court in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v. Boonsom Boonyanit [2001] 2 CLJ 133 be applied also to the case of "fraud"?

2. Whether the inclusion of further evidence under r. 7(3A) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994 precludes the plaintiffs/respondents from particularizing the incidents of fraud in the statement of claim as prescribed by O. 18 r. 12 of the Rules of the High Court 1980?

In the memorandum of appeal, the appellant has advanced 13 grounds but they appear to relate only to the first question. This is hardly surprising since the second question is quite inconsequential to the issues in dispute between the parties. It is in that context that our consideration must fall.

Now, this case involved a dispute over 2 pieces of land known as EMR 1265 Lot 1346 and EMR 1266 Lot 1347 Mukim of Selama, Perak (the said lands). They belonged to one Hor Choy, the grandfather of the respondents. On 30 December 1