INTERNATIONAL Senate endorsement ref.

:
ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY Senate endorsement date:
MALAYSIA Version no:
Version effective date:

COURSE OUTLINE
With Reading List and Rubrics
1. Course Title: Law of Probate

2. Course Code: LAWS 2240

3. Credit Value: 2

4. MQF Level: 6

5. Affected Batch: 2020/2021 onwards

6. Centre of Studies: Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws

7. Department/Unit: Islamic Law Department

8. Course Synopsis: The course deals with the law of probate in Malaysia. It
concentrates on the law relating to testate succession, which
focuses on the applicable law on the execution of a will in
accordance with Wills Act 1959. The course also emphasises
on intestate succession as governed by Distribution Act 1958
and other relevant laws. The discussion includes the law
relating to the administration of estate, which is procedural
in nature. Reference is made to Rules of Court 2012, Probate
and Administration Act 1959 (Act 97) and Small Estates
(Distribution) Act 1955 (Act 98).

9. Course Classification within the Curriculum: Core Course

10. Prerequisite(s) (if any): None

11. Course Learning Outcomes

Bloom’s Programme
Taxonomy Soft skills
No. Outcomes Outcomes
(KI)
C A P (PO)
1 Describe the law for the 1 1 1 CS1, LL1 1, 3, 5
distribution of testate and intestate
estates accordingly
2 Apply the modes of estate 3 4 5 CS1, CS3, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6
distribution CT2, LL2
3 Compute the problems and 3 2 2 CS1,CS3, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7
discrepancies relating to the CT1,CT2
administration of estate CT3, TS1,
LL1
4 Determine the procedures 3 3 3 CS3, CT3, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
applicable for the administration LL1
of estate in Malaysia

12. LO - Instruction Method - Assessment Alignment:

Outcomes Teaching-Learning Methods Assessment Methods

LO1 Lectures, Seminars Written assignment, Final
examination
LO2 Seminars, Case study, Problem Oral presentation/participation,
based learning written assignment, final
examination
LO3 Seminars, Case study, Problem Filing/legal opinion/role play
based learning
LO4 Lectures, Seminars Written assignment

13. Assessment Methods Weightage:

Methods Percentage
Written Submission 15
Oral Presentation 10
Case Review 10
Individual Assessment 5
Common Test 20
Final Examination 40
TOTAL 100
14. Student Learning Time:

1. Instruction Component Total Allocated Hours

1.1. Teacher-oriented methods
Lectures 16
1.2. Student-oriented methods
Seminars, Case study, Problem based learning 12
Total Instructor Contact Hours: 28
2. Independent Learning Component Total Estimated Hours
2.1. Reading and revision
16
2.2. Estimated hours for preparation toward assessments
Case Review 10
Oral Presentation/participation 5
Filing/legal opinion/role play 8
Final examination 10
3. Assessment Outside Instruction Hours Total Allocated Hours
Final examination 3

TOTAL SLT 80
 15. Course Contents and Related SLT:
Content outline of the course / module and the SLT per topic
Week Topics
1 INTRODUCTION
 An overview of the course
 Important Terminologies
TYPES OF WILL
 Formal will
 Informal will/privileged will
 Foreign will
CHARACTERISTICS OF WILL
 Scope not limited to property
 Declaration of intention
 Prescribed form
 Revocable
 It speaks from death
 Ambulatory
2&3 REQUIREMENTS OF A VALID
WILL
 Testator must attain the age of
majority
 Testator must possess the animus
testandi (testamentary capacity
 Mental capacity
 Intention
 Free Choice
 Burden of Proof
 Situations that may affect the
mental capacity
 Delusion
 Lucid interval
Learning Task/Reading
hours
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
1-22
Recommended reading
Varsha L. Doshi. (1994). pp. 5-8.
Sidhu, Mahinder Singh (1998), pp.1-7,
23-29
Jack Lee Tsen-Ta, (1994), pp.175-177
2 Mohd Hisham Mohd Kamal, (2004),pp.
109-110
Cases
Re White’s Application [1975] 2 NSWLR
125
Re Rippon’s Estate [1943] P 61
Re Wingham, Andrews v Wingham [1949]
P 187
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
23-38
3
Recommended reading
Sidhu, Mahinder Singh (1998), pp. 67-71
Cases
Banks v Good Fellow [1870] LR 5 QB
549
Re Ng Toh Piew, deceased (1950) MLJ 273
Marquis of Winchester’s Case [1598] 6
Rep. 23
In the Estate of Hew Wai Kwong [2000] 5
3 CLJ 604
Tho Yow Pew & Anor v Chua Kooi Hean
[2002] 5 CLJ 58

 Time for specifying the test
 Insanity following will
 Rule in Parker v Felgate
[1833] 8 P.D. 171
4  Testator must comply with the
requirements of formalities:
 The will must be in writing;
 The will must be signed by
the testator
 The will must be attested by
two or more witnesses
 Who can be a witness?
 S8
 S 9 beneficiary as a witness?
 Ss. 10 & 11
 Anybody who is mentally and
visually capable and attained the
age of majority
 Issue of presence
Lee Ing Chin & Ors. v. Gan Yook Chin &
Anor [2003]2 CLJ 19; [2004] 4 CLJ 309
(Appeal)
Sethambal Doraiappah & Anor v.
Krishnavani Muniandy [2004] 1 CLJ 869
Eu Boon Yap & Ors. v. Ewe Kean Hoe
[2008] 2 MLJ 868
Barry v Butlin (1938) Moo PC 480
Udham Singh v Inder Kaur [1971] 2 MLJ
263
In the Estate of Hew Wai Kwong, deceased
[2000] 5 CLJ 604
Dew v Clark [1926] 3 Add 79
Chamber and Yatman v Queen’s Proctor
[1849] 2 Curt 415
In the Matter of the Estate of Eusoff
Mohamed Salleh Angullia deceased [1939]
MLJ 100
Parker v Felgate [1883] 8 P.D. 171
Battan Singh v Amirchand [1948] A.C. 161
Hsu Yik Chai v Hsu Yaw Tang & Anor
[1982] 2 MLJ 227
Subramaniam v Rajaratnam (1957) MLJ
11
Morris & Ors v Nories Lim & Others
[1928-41] SCR 24
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
39-55
4
Cases
Christian v Intsiful (1954) 1 WLR 253
Hodson v Barnes (1926) 43 TLR 71
Whiting v Turner (1903) 89 LT 71
Leong Chee Keong v. Tan Leng Kee
[2001] 1 MLJ 408
Re Estate of Loh Ah Tong [1949] MLJ
Supp 33
Re Jenkins [1863] 164 E.R. 1208
Re Finn [1935] All ER Rep 419
In the Goods of Chalcraft [1948] 1 All ER
700; P 222
4 Kulsome Bee, decd. [1930] SSLR 64
Thorpe v Beswick (1881) 6 QBD 311
Re Colling (1972) 3 All ER 729
 Re Groffman [1969] 2 AER 108
Dr. K. Shanmuganathan v Periasamy
[1994] 2 CLJ 225
Barret v Bem [2012] 2 All ER 920
Hudson v Parker (1884) 1 Rob. Eccl. 14,
24
Re Gibson [1949] 2 All ER 90
Casson v Dade [1781] 1 Bro CC 99
Savinder Kaur @ Sindo Kaur d/o Fauja
Singh v Chamjit Singh s/o Thakar Singh
[1998] 1 CLJ Supp 402

5&6 ALTERATION Compulsory reading

 S. 15 Wills Act 1959 Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
2 57-60

Cases
Ffinch v Combe [1894] P 191
Re Horsford (1874) L.R 3 P & D 211
Re Itter 91950) 1 All ER 68
Re Choo Kim Kiew 91949) MLJ 144

REVOCATION Compulsory reading

 Automatic
Revocation/Involuntary
Revocation
 Section 12 Wills Act 1959
 Exceptions:
 In exercise of a power of
appointment
 Will made in
contemplation of
marriage
 Voluntary Revocation
 Section 14 Wills Act 1959
 by will or codicil duly
executed
 by some writing declaring the
intention to revoke
 by actual destruction
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
60-74
Cases
2
Re Lee Kim Chye [1936] MLJ 60
Re Wan Kee Cheong [1975] 2 MLJ 152
Mette v Mette (1859) 1 Sw & Tr 416
Re Roberts [1978] 3 All ER 225, CA
In the Matter of Harry Gilligan [1950] P
32
Re Gray’s Estate (1963) 107 Sol Jo 156
Pilot v Gainfort [1931] P 103
Sallis v Jones [1936] P 43; [1935] All ER
872
3
Re Mana Seena Veeran, decd. [1976] 1
MLJ 1
Re Hawkley’s Settlement (1934) Ch. 384
Re Howard, decd. (1944) P 39
In the Goods of Durance (1872) LR 2 P &
D 406
Hobbs v Knights (1838) 1 Curt. 768
In the Estate of Nunn, decd. [1936] 1 All
ER 555

7 REVIVAL
 Section 16 Wills Act 1959
FAILURE OF GIFTS BY WILL
 when the beneficiary or
his/her spouse is the attesting
witness
 when the beneficiary pre-
deceases the testator
 when the subject matter of the
will ceases to exist
 when there is uncertainty in
the will
 when the beneficiary
disclaims the gift in the will
 when there is a conditional
gift and failure of that
condition
 when the beneficiary
commits act contrary to
public policy and law
8 INTESTACY
 Distribution Act 1958
 Legitimacy Act 1971
 Adoption Act 1952
 Registration of Adoption Act
1952
 Presumption of Survivorship
Act 1950
 Law Reform (Marriage &
Divorce) Act 1976
Re Woodward’s Goods (1871) LR 2 P &
D 206
Cheese v Lovejoy [1877] 2 P.D 251, 253
Brunt v Brunt (1873) LR 3 P & D 37
Re Ansley (Times, 6 Feb 1973)
In the Goods of Hine (1893) P 285
Re Dadd’s Goods [1857] Dea & Sw 290
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
1 74-77
Cases
Re Wan Kee Cheong [1975] 2 MLJ 152
In the Goods of Davies (1952) 2 AER
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
85-91
4
Cases
Kulsome Bee, decd. [1930] SSLR 64
Ss 19 & 25 Wills Act 1959
Re Whorwood, Ogle v Lord Sherborne
(1887) 34 Ch. D 446
Re Horton [1979] 88 DLR 264
Re Meredith (1924) 2 Ch 552
Re Sikes (1927) 1 Ch 364
Re Slater [1906] 2 Ch 480
Peck v Holsey (1976) 2 P.Wms 387
Asten v Asten [1894] 3 Ch 260
Re Stephenson [1897] 1 Ch 75
Hsu Yik Chai v Hsu Yau Tang & Anor.
(1982) 2 MLJ 227, 230.
Re Giles [1971] 3 All ER 1141
Re Sigsworth [1935] 1 Ch 98
Compulsory reading
Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
93-104
Cases
Yeap Chan Aik v Yeap Chan Hoe & ors
2
[2000] 1 MLJ 78
Shamugam S.Kanapathy v Pappah
Chinniah Nadar [1994] 2 CLJ 265
  Inheritance Family Provision Chan Tai Ern Bermillo & Anor v Ketua
Act1971 Pengarah Pendaftaran Negara & Ors
[2019] 7 MLJ 113

9 ADMINISTRATION OF Compulsory reading

ESTATE Akmal Hidayah Halim et al. (2016), pp.
2 105-113
 Administration of Testate Estate
 Administration by the High Recommended reading
Court Akmal Hidayah Halim (2018), pp. 125-173
-S 24(f) Courts of Judicature
Act 1964
-Rules of Court 2012
-Probate and Administration
Act 1959

Administration of Intestate Estate

 Intestate estate is of three
kinds:

i) Small estate

-Small Estates (Distribution)

Act 1955.
-Small Estates (Distribution)
Regulation 1955

ii) Non-small estate

-Rules of Court 2012
-Probate and Administration
Act 1959

iii) Summary administration of

estate
-Public Trust Corporation
Act 1995.

10 Group Presentation
4
11 Group Presentation
4
12 Group Presentation 4

13 Group Presentation 4

14 Revision & Closure

4
 TOTAL
52

16. References:
16.1. Required

Akmal Hidayah Halim, Wan Noraini Mohd Salim, Mohd Hisham Mohd Kamal dan Nora Abdul Haq.
(2016). The Law of Wills and Intestacy in Malaysia (2nd Edition). Kuala Lumpur: Mashi Publication Sdn.
Bhd.

Doshi, Varsha Lalitchandra (1994). Making A Will, Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn Bhd., Kuala Lumpur.

Akmal Hidayah Halim (2012). Administration of Estate in Malaysia Law and Procedure. Petaling Jaya:
Sweet & Maxwell Asia.

Clive V Margrave-Jones (1993). Mellows, The Law of Succession, 5th ed., London: Butterworth.

Sidhu, Mahinder Singh (1998).The Law of Wills, Probate Administration and Succession in Malaysia and
Singapore, Kuala Lumpur: International Law Book Services.

16.2. Recommended

Sundrum, Kanesh, Administration of Estates Handbook, Kuala Lumpur: Malayan Law Journal Sdn. Bhd.,
2000.

Balan, P., “Summary Administration of Small Estates,” Journal of Malaysian & Comparative Law, 1984.

Chatterton, David A., Wills, 2nd ed., London: Longman Law, Tax and Finance, 1990.
Finch, Janet, Wills, Inheritance, and the Family, Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1996.

Mohd Hisham Mohd Kamal, “Collective Security: United Nations Practice and Islamic Perspective”,
Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia,
2004, pp. 109-110.

Gopalkrishnan, T.P., T.P. Gopakrishnan’s Law of Wills, 4th ed., Allahabad: Law Book Co., 1984.

Raman, G., Probate and Administration in Singapore and Malaysia, 2nd Ed., Singapore, Lexis Nexis,
2005.

Sawyer, Caroline, Succession, Wills and Probate, London: Cavendish, 1995.

 Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Akmal Dr. Uzaimah Ibrahim Prof. Dr. Farid Sufian Shuaib
Hidayah Halim Head Dean
Department of Islamic Law Department of Islamic Law Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws

ANNEX

I. Course Instructors Details

Semester: 1 Academic Year: 2021/2022

No Name Email Department

.
1 Assoc. Prof. Dr. Akmal akmalh@iium.edu.my Legal Practice
Hidayah Halim
2. Dr. Tajul Aris Ahmad tajularis@iium.edu.my Islamic Law
Bustami
II. Programme Learning Outcomes

At the end of the programme, students are expected to be able to:

No. Outcomes Outcome Domain

1 demonstrates knowledge of jurisdictional Knowledge & Understanding,
dispute between Shariah Court and Civil Court. Cognitive Skills, Practical
Skills

2 build understanding about the working Cognitive Skills, Practical

environment of Law or Shariah Law such as in Skills
the courts, law firms, corporations, and legal
aid centres;

3 perform critical, analytical, and problem- Practical Skills

solving skills with the ability to apply relevant
principles, concepts and theories in Law or
Shariah Law to a given situation;
4 explain international development in Law or Knowledge & Understanding
Shariah Law;

5 demonstrates adequate level of proficiency in Practical Skills, Interpersonal

required languages such as Bahasa Malaysia, Skills, Communication Skills,
English Language and Arabic Language Digital Skills
(whichever is suitable) and practical skills
including communication (oral and written),
negotiation, client counselling and interview,
mooting and research skills;
6 apply problem solving and numeracy skills by Knowledge & Understanding,
organising and synthesising fundamental of Cognitive Skills, Numeracy
legal principles, concepts and theories and Skills
authoritative sources of law in Law or Shariah
Law;
7 apply leadership, managerial and Leadership, Autonomy &
entrepreneurial skills to establish career Responsibility, Entrepreneurial
opportunities in legal or Shariah Skills
profession;
8 apply relevant skills for lifelong learning and Personal Skills
continuing professional development; and
9 display an awareness, and as far as practicable, Ethics & Professionalism
internalise the ethics and etiquette of the
profession, as well as moral obligations to the
community and humanity.
 LAW S 2240: Law of Probate
Course Assessment System, Sem. 1 (2021-2022)

1. There is no tutorial for this course.

2. According to new Assessment System, there are four components of assessment for
Course Work (40%): (1) Written assignment 15 marks, (2) Oral presentation 10 marks
and (3) Case Review 10 marks and (4) Individual assessment 5 marks. See attached
scoring rubrics for each assessment component.

3. Written assignment (which carries 15 marks) must be in the form of opinion writing.
Written paper is assessed in group. If traces of plagiarism or copying are found, no
marks will be given and action will be taken.

4. Only 25 minutes will be allowed for oral presentation of a case review (which carries
10 marks). Students will be divided into groups and the lecturer will assign a particular
question to each group. The presentation must be supported by power point slides.
Marks will be given on your oral skills based on the rubrics.

5. The other 10 marks are allocated for the written submission of the case review in
which the student is required to submit in form of a pamphlet. This is also a group
assessment.

6. The remaining 5 marks is allocated for ‘individual assessment’ which will be

assessed during the oral presentation.

7. Scoring rubrics are attached. Study the rubrics carefully in order to know the
assessment criteria.
 The Law of Probate – LAWS 2240
Rubric for Evaluation of Written Assignment
Performance Levels Score
Rubric (Points Scale)
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor 15

Information clearly Information Information clearly Information

relates to the main clearly relates to relates to the main has little or
Quality of topic. Points are the main topic. topic. Points are nothing to do
Information clearly made. Points are made, insufficiently with the main
Analysis is but analysis is developed. topic. There is
sophisticated. weak. Analysis is no critical
minimal. analysis.

Marks 5 3.5 2 0.5

All sources All sources All sources Some sources

(information and (information and (information and are not
Sources graphics) are graphics) are graphics) are accurately
accurately accurately accurately documented
documented in the documented, but a documented, but
desired format. few are not in the many are not in the
desired format. desired format.

Marks 4 3 2 1

No grammatical, Almost no A few grammatical, Many

Mechanic spelling or grammatical, spelling, or grammatical,
punctuation errors. spelling or punctuation errors. spelling, or
punctuation errors. punctuation
errors.

Marks 3 2 1 0.5

Information is very Information is Information is The

Organization organized with well- organized with organized, but information
constructed well-constructed paragraphs are not appears to be
paragraphs and paragraphs. well-constructed. disorganized.
subheadings.

Marks 3 2 1 0.5

TOTAL SCORE /15

 Law of Probate – LAWS 2240
Rubric for Evaluation of Oral Presentation/Individual Assessment
Rubric Performance Levels (Points Scale) Score
Components Marks
Excellent Good Fair Poor 10
Organization Student shows Student presents Audience has Delivery not
enthusiasm and information in difficulty following smooth and
presents information logical sequence presentation audience
in logical, which audience because student attention lost
interesting sequence can follow. jumps around. because there is
which engages the no sequence of
audience. information.

2 1.5 1 0.5

Subject Student Student is at ease Student is Student does

Knowledge demonstrates full with information uncomfortable with not have grasp
knowledge (more and gives expected information and is of information;
than required) and answers to all able to answer only student cannot
answers all questions, but fails rudimentary answer
questions with to elaborate. questions. questions about
explanations and subject.
elaboration.
4 3 2 1

Style/Mechan The electronic The electronic Lacks style and The

ic presentation displays presentation is reads more like a presentation
elements of clear and logical list of information, lacks a clear
creativity and style, and contains than as a support focus and there
and is not simply a pertinent for an oral are many
list of information. information and presentation. Lacks errors.
The electronic images. Good neatness and Electronic
presentation is clear oral clarity. presentation is
presented in a clear presentation. not creative.
and concise manner.
2 1.5 1 0.5

Communicati Student uses a clear Student's voice is Student's voice is Student

on & Time voice and correct, clear. Student low. Student mumbles,
Management precise pronounces most incorrectly incorrectly
pronunciation of words correctly. pronounces terms pronounces
terms so that all Most audience and/or the terms and/or
audience members members can hear presentation was the presentation
can hear presentation. The somewhat short or was too brief or
presentation. The presentation was somewhat long. too long.
presentation was of of the proper
the proper duration. duration.
2 1.5 1 0.5

TOTAL SCORE /10