XAT v XAU: Testamentary Capacity and Validity of Will Dispute
XAT appealed the District Court's decision regarding the validity of her deceased husband's will, in which he bequeathed his estate to the second respondent, XAV, his half-sister, and appointed the first respondent, XAU, his nephew, as executor. The appellant challenged the will, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, forgery, and undue influence. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the deceased had testamentary capacity and that the will was rational on its face, despite the circumstances of its execution shortly after the deceased's surgery. The court found insufficient evidence of forgery or undue influence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court (Family Division)1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding the validity of a will. The court dismissed the appeal, finding the deceased had testamentary capacity despite circumstances surrounding the will's execution.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XAT | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Rajwin Singh Sandu |
| XAU | Respondent | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Won | Xu Daniel Atticus |
| XAV | Respondent | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Won | Xu Daniel Atticus |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Rajwin Singh Sandu | Rajwin & Yong LLP |
| Xu Daniel Atticus | Exodus Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The deceased died on 2 September 2015, leaving a will dated 17 August 2015.
- The will bequeathed the deceased's estate to his half-sister, XAV, and excluded his wife, XAT.
- The deceased stated in the will that he married XAT to help her extend her stay in Singapore.
- XAT challenged the will, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, forgery, and undue influence.
- The deceased had surgery to amputate his left forefoot five days before signing the will.
- The first respondent claimed he lost the original will.
- A handwriting expert found the authenticity of the signature on the will to be inconclusive.
5. Formal Citations
- XAT v XAU and another, District Court Appeal No 22 of 2024, [2025] SGHCF 4
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant became the deceased's tenant. | |
| Appellant married the deceased. | |
| Appellant and the deceased were interviewed by reporters. | |
| Appellant began paying rent to the deceased. | |
| Deceased signed a receipt settling all rents before marriage. | |
| Deceased authorized the appellant to rent out a room. | |
| Appellant rented out a room. | |
| Appellant took the deceased to Tan Tock Seng Hospital. | |
| Deceased was transferred to a community hospital. | |
| Deceased had surgery to amputate his left forefoot. | |
| Will dated. | |
| The deceased died. | |
| Appellant learned of the will. | |
| Grant of probate issued to the first respondent. | |
| First respondent told the appellant to vacate the flat. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Testamentary Capacity
- Outcome: The court found that the deceased had testamentary capacity at the time of executing the will.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2010] 4 SLR 373
- [2009] 3 SLR(R) 631
- Validity of Will
- Outcome: The court upheld the validity of the will.
- Category: Substantive
- Undue Influence
- Outcome: The court found no evidence of undue influence in the execution of the will.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 3 SLR 1270
- Forgery
- Outcome: The court found insufficient evidence to prove the will was forged.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Invalidation of Will
9. Cause of Actions
- Challenge to Validity of Will
10. Practice Areas
- Wills and Estates
- Estate Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tat Seng Machine Movers Pte Ltd v Orix Leasing Singapore Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 1101 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge's finding of fact unless plainly wrong or against the weight of evidence. |
| Chee Mu Lin Muriel v Chee Ka Lin Caroline (Chee Ping Chian Alexander and another, interveners) | N/A | Yes | [2010] 4 SLR 373 | Singapore | Cited for the principles regarding testamentary capacity, the presumption of knowledge and approval of a will's contents, and the effect of suspicious circumstances. |
| George Abraham Vadakathu v Jacob George | N/A | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 631 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the ultimate inquiry is whether the court is satisfied that the contents of the will do truly represent the testator’s testamentary intentions. |
| ULV v ULW | N/A | Yes | [2019] 3 SLR 1270 | Singapore | Cited for the principle regarding undue influence, that the appellant has to show that the deceased was not merely persuaded but pressured into losing his freedom of choice, or that the deceased was coerced into doing that which he did not desire to do. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Testamentary Capacity
- Will
- Undue Influence
- Forgery
- Grant of Probate
- Long-Term Visit Pass
- Sham Marriage
15.2 Keywords
- Testamentary Capacity
- Will
- Estate
- Appeal
- Singapore
- Family Justice Courts
16. Subjects
- Wills
- Estate Law
- Family Law
17. Areas of Law
- Succession and Wills
- Family Law
- Probate Law