KOK AH HWOI @ KOK AH HOI v 1. ) COLUM AIWAH MCNAMARA 2. ) LEE SUAN CHOO
ba-22ncvc-111-03-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 14 August 2025 • BA-22NCvC-111-03/2021 • 58 min read
75 cases cited
(0 SG, 75 foreign)
Catchwords
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. 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.
Judges (1)
Counsel (13)
Arifin & Partners Firm Ben Lee & Sharen Firm Peters Chambers Firm Annesha Meera Jacob Samuel Counsel Plaintiff James Ng Kean Yip Counsel Defendant Nur Diana Ramlan Counsel Defendant Nurul Amira Ezzaty Nordin Counsel Defendant Ong Siew Wan Counsel Defendant Paul Joseph Peters Counsel Plaintiff Sharen Rosli Counsel Defendant Steven Wong Chin Fung Counsel Defendant Wan Elya Nadiah Wan Azizi Counsel Defendant Watson Peters Counsel Plaintiff
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (75)
UK (3)
[2010] 1 WLR 2020 [2013] EWHC 2269 [2015] EWHC 1240
MY (72)
[1934] 1 MLRH 130 [1935] 1 MLJ 10 [1949] 1 MLJ 144 [1949] 1 MLRH 354 [1951] 1 MLJ 21 [1969] 1 MLRH 577 [1970] 1 MLJ 40 [1991] 1 MLJ 428 [1993] 2 MLRH 743 [1993] 4 CLJ 389 [1997] 2 CLJ 153 [1997] 3 AMR 3012 [1997] 3 MLJ 61 [2002] 3 AMR 3703 [2002] 4 CLJ 90 [2002] 4 MLJ 97 [2003] 2 AMR 357 [2003] 2 CLJ 19 [2003] 2 MLJ 97 [2004] 4 CLJ 309 [2004] 6 AMR 781 [2005] 2 MLJ 1 [2005] 5 AMR 185 [2005] 6 MLJ 540 [2009] 6 MLJ 751 [2010] 1 CLJ 381 [2010] 2 AMR 609 [2010] 2 MLJ 181 [2011] 1 CLJ 805 [2011] 2 AMR 680 [2011] 6 MLJ 1 [2012] 10 MLJ 280 [2012] 9 CLJ 352 [2012] MLJU 1070 [2012] MLJU 781 [2013] 1 MLRH 47 [2013] 3 MLJ 457 [2013] 4 AMR 127 [2013] 4 CLJ 329 [2015] 5 AMR 497 [2015] 5 MLJ 1 [2015] 7 CLJ 584 [2016] 7 CLJ 914 [2016] AMEJ 1276 [2017] 10 MLJ 387 [2017] 3 AMR 625 [2017] 4 MLJ 697 [2017] 5 CLJ 418 [2019] 11 MLJ 421 [2019] 5 MLJ 421 [2019] 6 MLRH 232 [2019] AMEJ 0540 [2019] AMEJ 0602 [2021] 6 MLRH 607 [2021] AMEJ 0303 [2021] AMEJ 0606 [2021] MLJU 344 [2021] MLJU 639 [2022] MLJU 792 [2023] AMEJ 2895 [2023] MLJU 3166 [2024] AMEJ 1413 [2024] AMEJ 2009 [2024] AMEJ 2813 [2024] MLJU 1476 [2024] MLJU 2250 [2024] MLJU 3336 [2025] 3 AMR 40 [2025] 3 MLJ 920 [2025] 5 CLJ 92 [2025] MLJU 1575 [2025] MLJU 586
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ba-22ncvc-111-03-2021)