JANICE NG WAN FONG v 1. ) NG POH LAN 2. ) FOONG PEK WEI 3. ) FOONG PEK SAN 4. ) HARTININGSIH 5. ) PAWS ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY

ba-22ncvc-434-10-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 30 September 2025 • BA-22NCvC-434-10/2024

Catchwords

Civil Procedure -Striking Out - Application under Order 18 Rule 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Rules of Court 2012 - Whether claim is frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process - Principles governing striking out - Whether claim discloses a reasonable or arguable cause of action - Drastic remedy to be invoked only in plain and obvious cases. Courts Jurisdiction - Exclusive jurisdiction of Syariah Court - Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution - Whether the claim for revocation of probate and administration of estate falls within civil High Court's jurisdiction - Whether the issue of conversion to Islam is merely incidental or collateral. Probate and Administration -Will - Validity of Will - Will executed prior to conversion - Invalidation of non-Muslim testator's Will upon conversion to Islam (Hukum Syarak) - Grant of Probate - Challenge to validity of probate - Revocation of grant obtained through concealment or misrepresentation. Estate Administration - Distribution of estate in accordance with Islamic law (faraid).

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure -Striking Out

Judges (1)

Asmah binti Musa Delivered

Parties (6)

Foong Pek San Defendant Foong Pek Wei Defendant Hartiningsih Defendant Janice Ng Wan Fong Plaintiff Ng Poh Lan Defendant Paws Animal Welfare Society Defendant

Case Significance

JANICE NG WAN FONG v 1. ) NG POH LAN 2. ) FOONG PEK WEI 3. ) FOONG PEK SAN 4.... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated September 30, 2025 (citation: ba-22ncvc-434-10-2024). The case was decided by Asmah binti Musa.

What was the outcome of JANICE NG WAN FONG v 1. ) NG POH LAN 2. ) FOONG PEK WEI 3. ) FOONG PEK SAN 4....?

JANICE NG WAN FONG v 1. ) NG POH LAN 2. ) FOONG PEK WEI 3. ) FOONG PEK SAN 4.... is a High Court decision dated September 30, 2025. The case was heard by Asmah binti Musa. See the full judgment for details.