The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Lau Kok Seng seeking the appointment of an independent administrator over assets allegedly belonging to his late mother’s estate, ruling that there was no necessity or expediency to justify such an order.
In a judgment delivered on June 25, Chief Justice Dato Seri Paduka Steven Chong, Justices of Appeal Sir Peter Gross and Sir Nicholas Blake upheld the High Court’s decision to refuse the application under Section 42 of the Probate and Administration Act.
The appeal arose from an ongoing probate dispute over the estate of the late Che Sung Kiaw, who died in 2020. Lau Kok Seng contends that a 2017 will leaving the estate to three sons is valid, while the respondents rely on an earlier 2003 will and previous findings concerning the deceased’s financial arrangements.
Representing the appellant was Abdul Hakim Ahmad Zakaria of Messrs Ahmad Zakaria & Associates, while Veronica Rajakanu and Pao Jia Wan of Messrs VK Rajakanu & Associates appeared for the respondents.
The Court found there was no evidence that the disputed assets were at risk of dissipation or mismanagement, noting that the respondents had managed the family assets for decades and had undertaken not to dispose of the funds pending further court orders.
The appellate court also placed weight on earlier findings that rejected allegations of fraud, breach of trust and misappropriation made against the respondents, describing those claims as wholly unsupported by evidence.It further observed that the proposed administrator, chartered accountant Sylvester Leong, could not be regarded as a neutral appointee, having previously testified on behalf of the appellant and being a witness to the disputed 2017 will.
Dismissing the appeal as having “no proper foundation”, the Court ordered the appellant to pay the respondents’ costs on an indemnity basis, finding that the appeal lacked any proper factual basis and repeated arguments that had already failed.
The Court also ordered a stay of further proceedings in the underlying probate action until the appellant pays the outstanding costs awarded in both the earlier civil suit and the present application.