Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners)

JudgeChan Sek Keong CJ
Judgment Date04 August 2010
Neutral Citation[2010] SGCA 27
Citation[2010] SGCA 27
Docket NumberCivil Appeal No 147 of 2009
Published date13 August 2010
Hearing Date18 March 2010
Plaintiff CounselSundaresh Menon SC (Rajah & Tann LLP) and Ang Cheng Hock SC and Melanie Chng (Allen& Gledhill LLP)
Date04 August 2010
Defendant CounselChew Kei-Jin (Tan Rajah & Cheah),Giam Chin Toon SC and Wong Hur Yuin (Wee Swee Teow & Co)
CourtCourt of Appeal (Singapore)
Subject MatterSuccession and Wills,Probate and Administration
Chan Sek Keong CJ (delivering the grounds of decision of the court):

This appeal, arising from Suit No 238 of 2007 (“Suit 238/07”), concerned the validity of a will made on 21 August 1996 (“the 1996 Will”) by Madam Goh Hun Keong (“Mdm Goh”). Prior to the making of the 1996 Will, Mdm Goh had made another will dated 16 March 1989 (“the 1989 Will”). The appellant, and propounder of the 1996 Will, in these proceedings was Muriel Chee (“Muriel”), a daughter of Mdm Goh. The respondent was Caroline Chee (“Caroline”), another daughter of Mdm Goh. The trial judge (“the Judge”) had declared the 1996 Will invalid (see Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners) [2009] SGHC 229 (“the Judgment”)). Muriel appealed against the Judge’s decision. We heard the appeal on 18 March 2010 and dismissed it. We now give our reasons.

Background facts

Mdm Goh was born on 2 February 1921 and died on 9 June 2004 from renal failure. She was married to Dr Chee Siew Oon (“Dr Chee”), who died in 1990. They had six children. In order of seniority, they are: Chee Ping Chian, Alexander (“Alexander”), the first intervener; Chee Man Lin, Maureen (“Maureen”), the second intervener; Chee Ping Kong (“Ping Kong”); Chee Ping Swee (“Ping Swee”); Muriel; and Caroline.

Alexander, Maureen and Ping Kong ordinarily resided in the United States of America (“the USA”) while Ping Swee, Muriel and Caroline ordinarily resided in Singapore. Muriel was a lawyer. Caroline was a doctor married to Paul Chew Tec Kuan (“Paul”), also a doctor. Caroline was Mdm Goh’s favourite child.

Mdm Goh was an English teacher, and after retirement, enjoyed much success in investing in property. After she died, her assets became the subject of the present dispute (see the Judgment at [24]), in particular a property at No 470 Holland Road (“the Holland Road House”) which was the most valuable property in her estate.

Mdm Goh was a very forceful person and had a strong will, and would often ignore the feelings of her children and treat them unfairly. On 16 March 1989, Mdm Goh executed the 1989 Will appointing Caroline, who was her favourite daughter, as the sole executrix of her estate and bequeathed to her almost the entire residuary estate including, inter alia, the Holland Road House (excluding $150,000 in cash which was bequeathed to Ping Swee). The 1989 Will was drafted and its execution witnessed by a lawyer frequently employed by Mdm Goh since the early 1980s, Mr Hin Hoo Sing (“Mr Hin”) and a clerk, Lim Bee Leng, both of M/s Hin Rai & Tan.

Prior to 1993, Mdm Goh lived with Ping Swee and his wife in the Holland Road House. When they moved out sometime in 1993, Mdm Goh moved into Muriel’s home at No 7 Greenleaf Place (“Greenleaf Place”). During this period, Caroline and Paul were looking for a residence of their own. Mdm Goh expressed her intention of transferring the Holland Road House to them by way of gift. This led to a disagreement between Caroline and Muriel, who felt strongly against Mdm Goh leaving such a large part of her estate to Caroline. Muriel wrote a letter to Alexander dated 25 June 1994 (“the 25 June 1994 letter”), the contents of which are set out at [37] of the Judgment, venting her frustration and proposing an equal distribution of Mdm Goh’s assets in a manner which, as will be seen, is very similar to the terms of the 1996 Will. She warned Alexander against showing the 25 June 1994 letter to Mdm Goh.

Mdm Goh eventually sold a half-share in the Holland Road House to Caroline and Paul for $2.5m on 12 June 1995, despite Muriel’s objections. Only $1.34m of the purchase price was actually paid, though Mdm Goh had acknowledged receipt of the remainder sum on 15 June 1995. Consequently, the Holland Road House was held in the names of Caroline, Paul and Mdm Goh as tenants in common with Caroline and Paul holding a half-share and Mdm Goh holding the other half-share. At around the time of the sale, Mdm Goh returned to Singapore from the USA and stayed in an apartment with her maid, San San Myint (“San San”), while the Holland Road House was being renovated.

Mdm Goh became unwell and saw a number of doctors from 1995 onwards. In addition to consulting her regular geriatrician, Dr Lee Kng Swan (“Dr KS Lee”), Mdm Goh also consulted Prof Lee Kok Onn (“Prof KO Lee”), an endocrinologist and physician. In November 1995, Prof KO Lee diagnosed Mdm Goh as suffering from an early onset of both Parkinson’s disease and dementia, for which he prescribed two drugs, Selegiline and Tacrine. In February 1996, Caroline brought Mdm Goh to visit a psychiatrist, Prof Kua Ee Heok (“Prof Kua”), after Mdm Goh complained of a lack of concentration and memory loss. Prof Kua made a provisional diagnosis of “depression, to exclude dementia” based on Mdm Goh’s poor short-term memory and her uncertainty as to what the year, month, day or date was. He prescribed three drugs: Haloperidol to reduce her symptoms of delusions; Stilnox, which is a type of sleeping pill; and Sertraline, an anti-depressant. In March 1996, Prof Kua administered the “Elderly Cognitive Assessment Questionnaire” (“ECAQ”) on Mdm Goh, which was a test for short-term memory loss, poor concentration and orientation, although it was not a diagnostic test for dementia. He diagnosed Mdm Goh as having Alzheimer’s disease and progressively poor memory. At his direction, Mdm Goh underwent a computed tomography scan in April 1996 (“the CT scan”), which showed the presence of multiple lacunar infarcts in her brain. Based on the CT scan, Prof Kua diagnosed Mdm Goh as suffering from a combination of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. He prescribed Tacrine for these conditions.

On 10 August 1996, Mdm Goh fell in the driveway of the Holland Road House and suffered lacerations to her head. She was treated by Dr John Isaac (“Dr Isaac”) at the National University Hospital, where she was discharged after observation overnight because Dr Isaac found her to be alert and oriented.

On 18 August 1996, Muriel, Ms May Oh (“MO”) and Dr Goh King Hua (“Dr Goh”) met with Mdm Goh at the Holland Road House. MO is an advocate and solicitor. MO’s father was a cousin of Dr Chee, Mdm Goh’s late husband. Dr Goh was Mdm Goh’s nephew and a general practitioner in medicine. The day after this meeting, Muriel faxed two documents to MO containing instructions for the preparation of the 1996 Will. The first document sent on 19 August 1996 contained a list of names of Mdm Goh’s children (“the First Fax”) while the second document (“the Second Fax”) sent on 21 August 1996 contained suggestions of terms to be included in the 1996 Will. The Second Fax also contained (a) a handwritten note by Muriel stating “Please consider the following ideas and call me if you need further clarification”; and (b) two handwritten amendments made by MO to the terms suggested therein to replace MO or “W” (who was Ms Wee Eng Hua, MO’s partner in her law firm) with Dr Goh’s wife as executor of the will and to allow Caroline and Paul one year, instead of six months, after Mdm Goh’s death to purchase Mdm Goh’s remaining half-share in the Holland Road House.

On 19 August 1996, Mdm Goh paid a brief visit to Prof KO Lee where he recommended that she see a neurologist, Dr Benjamin Ong (“Dr Ong”), based on the multiple lacunar infarcts he observed in the CT scan.

On 21 August 1996, three days after the meeting at the Holland Road House, MO and Dr Goh witnessed the execution of the 1996 Will by Mdm Goh at Greenleaf Place, Muriel’s residence. Muriel was in another room during the execution of the will. It is not disputed that it was MO who drafted the 1996 Will. Under the terms of the 1996 Will, Caroline and Paul were given the option to purchase Mdm Goh’s remaining half-share in the Holland Road House at the “prevailing market price” within one year of Mdm Goh’s death, and the residuary estate was to be divided among Mdm Goh’s other children, namely, Alexander, Maureen, Ping Kong, Ping Swee and Muriel. Clause 2.1 of the 1996 Will further explained that the dispositions were so made because Caroline and Paul had been sold a half-share of the Holland Road House at a “discounted price of $2.5 million in 1995”.

In early September 1996, Prof Kua took Mdm Goh off Sertraline, Stilnox, Haloperidol and Tacrine because of his suspicion that these drugs had contributed to her falls. A week later, Mdm Goh visited Dr Ong, who noted that Mdm Goh exhibited abnormal gait and palmomental reflexes. Separately, Muriel brought Mdm Goh to see another geriatrician, Dr Chan Kin Ming (“Dr Chan”), in November 1996. Dr Chan conducted an ECAQ as well as a clock completion test on Mdm Goh. He informed Muriel and Mdm Goh that Mdm Goh’s scores were consistent with cognitive impairment, of which dementia was a cause. Based on her medical history, Dr Chan assessed that Mdm Goh’s falls were a result of her being over-medicated.

Subsequently, Mdm Goh did several things which showed that her mental faculties had improved considerably. On 8 December 1996 at MO’s house, Mdm Goh signed an instrument prepared by W granting Muriel a power of attorney over her affairs (“the 1996 POA”). This 1996 POA was subsequently revoked by Mdm Goh by an instrument of revocation on 14 January 1997 (“the POA Revocation”) after Mdm Goh found out that Muriel had attempted to obtain information on the prior sale of a half-share in the Holland Road House to Caroline and Paul. The POA Revocation was prepared by Mr Hin and signed at his office. Mr Hin also recorded an unsigned statement by Mdm Goh stating, inter alia, that she was not quite clear about the powers she had given to Muriel and that she was willing to give half of the Holland Road House to Caroline. It was not clear whether this statement relating to the gift referred to the half-share she had already transferred to Caroline and Paul or the remaining half-share owned by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Wong Meng Cheong v Ling Ai Wah
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 27 d4 Outubro d4 2011
    ...plc v Khaira [1992] 1 WLR 623 (folld) Beddoe, Re; Downes v Cottam [1893] 1 Ch 547 (folld) Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline) [2010] 4 SLR 373 (refd) England's Settlement Trusts, Re; Dobb v England [1918] 1 Ch 24 (folld) George Abraham Vadakathu v Jacob George [2009] 3 SLR (R) 631; [......
  • Goh Yng Yng Karen (executrix of the estate of Liew Khoon Fong (alias Liew Fong), deceased) v Goh Yong Chiang Kelvin
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 17 d4 Setembro d4 2020
    ...of property to one’s successors. In Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners) [2010] 4 SLR 373, the Court of Appeal found that the evidence surrounding the preparation and execution of a will in that case did not show that it had been pro......
  • UAM v UAN and another
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 13 d4 Abril d4 2017
    ...executed in “ordinary circumstances”: Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners) [2010] 4 SLR 373 (“Muriel Chee”) at [46]. The defendants are not alleging any lack of mental capacity, and in the course of trial withdrew earlier contentions......
  • Wong Meng Cheong and another v Ling Ai Wah and another
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 27 d4 Outubro d4 2011
    ...is for the propounder of a will to prove: Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners) [2010] 4 SLR 373 at [52]. WYC’s functional abilities to make decisions around the time the Transfer WYC’s conduct in the period surrounding the Transfer S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
2 books & journal articles
  • A TALE OF TWO CAPACITIES
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2022, March 2022
    • 1 d2 Março d2 2022
    ...All views expressed are in the author's personal capacity and all errors remain his own. 2 Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline [2010] 4 SLR 373 at [60]; Feltham v Freer Bouskell [2013] WTLR 1363 at [64], per Charles Hollander QC sitting as deputy judge; Pates v Craig, the Estate of th......
  • Case Comment ASSESSING MENTAL CAPACITY
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2020, December 2020
    • 1 d2 Dezembro d2 2020
    ...against some other person, and not simply just the donor. However, the donor has no capacity. He is vulnerable. [emphasis added] 77 [2010] 4 SLR 373. 78 Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline [2010] 4 SLR 373 at [37]. 79 Sheffield City Council v E & S [2004] EWHC 2808 (Fam), per Munby J ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT