Evidence Law Expert Opinion : Handwriting

LEE ING CHIN @ LEE TECK SENG & ORS v GAN  YOOK  CHIN  &   ANOR

COURT OF APPEAL (KUALA LUMPUR)

Fact Of The Case

• This appeal by the defendants concerned the validity of a will.

• The plaintiffs' case was that the deceased's alleged will was bad because: (a) it was a forgery; (b) the deceased lacked testamentary capacity; and (c) there were suspicious circumstances surrounding the making of the will.

Fact Of The Case

• The defendants' case was that: (a) the will was the true, genuine and the last will and testament of the deceased

• (b) it was prepared on the instructions of the deceased, explained to him, signed by him before a solicitor

• (c) the deceased had the requisite testamentary capacity to make the will; and

• (d) the suspicious circumstances, if any, surrounding the making of the will and relied on by the plaintiffs had been sufficiently dispelled.

Fact Of The Case

• The learned judge held that the will was a forgery and that the deceased did not have a sound disposing mind

Held

• the court allowed the appeal :• At the time deceased made the will, he

had testamentary capacity and • The learned judge accepted entirety of two

handwriting witnesses called by P• rejecting the evidence of two witnesses of

behalf defendant.

Held

• The court undue weight on accepting handwriting evidence then direct evidence by defendant’s witnesses.

• The court erred in counting evidence.

Relevant Principles

• If there is conflict between the direct testimony of a disinterested witness on the one side and that of a handwriting expert on the other as to the genuineness of the execution of a document, then it is a safe course for a court to prefer the direct evidence.

Relevant Principles

• the court cannot too much depend on opinion of a handwriting expert and undue weight

• opinion of a handwriting expert may be of assistance to the court in coming to a conclusion.

• The court should prefer direct evidence by witness who actually seen in.