TAN SUAN SIM PENCELAH Ooi Joo Aik

TAN SUAN SIM PENCELAH Ooi Joo Aik

The Court held that the Proposed Intervener's presence was necessary for the effectual and complete determination of issues arising from the probate and the letters of administration; the incorrect citation of Order 72 instead of Order 71 was a curable technical non-compliance that did not prejudice the Applicant; and the overriding interest of justice and the Court's inherent powers justified allowing intervention. Therefore the Application to intervene was allowed with no order as to costs.

Citation
PA-32NCvC-204-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: Tan Suan Sim; Proposed Intervener: Ooi Joo Aik
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 December 2022
Case Number
PA-32NCvC-204-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Probate Originating Summons / Application to Intervene
Outcome
Application to intervene allowed
Legal Topics
Intervention, Letters of Administration, Validity of Will, Misjoinder/non Joinder, Rules of Court Compliance
Source Language
Malay/English
Probate Civil Procedure Estate Administration Intervention Letters of Administration Validity of Will Misjoinder/non Joinder Rules of Court Compliance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Suan Sim

Applicant

Ooi Joo Aik

Proposed Intervener

Procedural Posture

Probate Originating Summons / Application to Intervene

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Proposed Intervener should be permitted to intervene in the probate proceeding to challenge the Will
  2. 2 Whether the incorrect citation of Order 72 instead of Order 71 is a fatal defect
  3. 3 Whether the presence of the Proposed Intervener is necessary to allow effectual and complete determination of issues relating to both the Will and letters of administration

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Proposed Intervener's presence was necessary for the effectual and complete determination of issues arising from the probate and the letters of administration; the incorrect citation of Order 72 instead of Order 71 was a curable technical non-compliance that did not prejudice the Applicant; and the overriding interest of justice and the Court's inherent powers justified allowing intervention. Therefore the Application to intervene was allowed with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Application to intervene allowed

Orders

  • Proposed Intervener allowed to intervene and to be added as a party to the Originating Summons proceeding
  • No order as to costs