Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS – LEGAL RIGHTS OF CHILDREN BORN IN UNREGISTERED CUSTOMARY MARRIAGES TO INHERIT INTESTATE ESTATES

1. Illustrative scenario:

X was born to parents who had a Chinese customary marriage that was not registered. When X’s father died intestate, he left behind his parents and cousins. X was told he was illegitimate because his parents’ marriage was not legally registered.

The key issue is whether a child born to parents in an unregistered Chinese customary marriage under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (‘the LRMDA’) can inherit from their father’s estate under the Distribution Act 1958 (‘the DA’).

2. Laws & Legal Principles:

  • The DA 1958 governs the distribution of estates for individuals who die intestate (without a will).
  • Section 6 of the DA 1958 outlines the order of succession for intestate estates.
  • The definitions of ‘child’ and ‘issue’ are provided in Section 3 of the DA 1958: –
  • ‘Child’ refers to a legitimate child, and in cases where the deceased was permitted multiple wives, it includes children from all such wives, but not adopted children (except under the Adoption Act 1952).
  • ‘Issue’ includes children and descendants of deceased children.
  • The term ‘issue’ indicates bloodline descendants, regardless of their legitimacy. Thus, anyone with a genetic or blood connection to the deceased is entitled to inherit.
  • The DA 1958 does not limit inheritance to legitimate children only.
  • Applying these principles to the scenario, X qualifies as ‘issue’ under the DA 1958. Therefore, he is entitled to inherit from his father’s estate despite any questions of legitimacy.

Reference Cases:

Tan Kah Fatt & Anor v. Tan Ying [2023] 2 MLJ 583

Recent Post

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »

BREACH OF CONTRACT – FORCE MAJEURE – FORCE MAJEURE UNPACKED: WHEN ‘REASONABLE ENDEAVOURS’ DON’T BEND CONTRACT TERMS

The UK Supreme Court clarified the limits of force majeure clauses, ruling that “reasonable endeavours” do not require a party to accept alternative performance outside the agreed contract terms. This decision emphasizes that force majeure clauses are meant to uphold, not alter, original obligations – even in unexpected circumstances. The case serves as a reminder for businesses to define alternative options explicitly within their contracts if flexibility is desired.

Read More »

NEGLIGENCE – MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE – HOSPITAL ACCOUNTABILITY REINFORCED: COURT UPHOLDS NON-DELEGABLE DUTY IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

In a landmark ruling, the court reinforced the hospital’s non-delegable duty of care, holding that even when services are outsourced to independent contractors, the hospital remains accountable for patient welfare. This decision emphasizes that vulnerable patients, reliant on medical institutions, must be safeguarded against harm caused by third-party providers. The ruling ultimately rejected the hospital’s defense of independence for contracted consultants, underscoring a high standard of duty owed to patients.

Read More »

CONTRACTS – CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF GOODS FOB – REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN BACK-TO-BACK CONTRACTS – COURT DEFINES LIMITS ON LIABILITY

In a complex dispute involving back-to-back contracts, the court clarified the boundaries for assessing damages, emphasizing that a chain of contracts does not automatically ensure liability passes through. Although substantial losses resulted from delays and disruption, the court highlighted the importance of the remoteness of damages, noting that each contract’s unique terms ultimately limited liability. This decision emphasise the need for parties in chain contracts to carefully define indemnity and liability provisions, as damages are assessed based on foreseeability rather than simply the structure of linked agreements.

Read More »

TORT – BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY – COURT CRACKS DOWN ON INSIDER LEAKS AND CORPORATE CONSPIRACY

In a recent ruling on corporate confidentiality, the court held two former employees liable for disclosing sensitive business information to a competitor, deeming it a breach of both employment contracts and fiduciary duties. This case highlights the serious consequences of unauthorized sharing of proprietary data and reinforces that such disclosures can lead to substantial legal and financial repercussions, even for the receiving parties if they knowingly benefit from confidential information.

Read More »
en_USEN
× Contact Us