Family fortunes hang in the balance as a bitter inheritance battle unfolds in the shadow of Malaysia’s iconic Genting Highlands. But here’s where it gets controversial: two daughters are challenging their late mother’s RM1.6 billion will, claiming it was executed under ‘suspicious circumstances’ and questioning her mental capacity at the time. Could this be a case of fraud, or a family feud gone too far? Let’s dive in.
The drama centers around the estate of Lim Siew Kim, the daughter of Genting founder Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong, who passed away in July 2022 at 73 after a battle with Stage 4 ovarian cancer. Her daughters, Chan T’shiao Li and Kimberley Chan T’shiao Min, have filed a civil suit in the High Court to invalidate her final will, arguing that her deteriorating health rendered her incapable of making sound decisions. And this is the part most people miss: there were two earlier wills, which the daughters claim make the final version highly questionable.
The will in question, signed on April 28, 2022, just months before her death, drastically altered the distribution of her assets. The Dikim Foundation, established by Siew Kim and her late husband, emerged as the primary beneficiary, inheriting over 70% of the residuary estate. Her son, Marcus Chan, also received a substantial share, including properties, shareholdings, and 30% of the estate. In stark contrast, T’shiao Li was left with RM900,000, while Kimberley received a mere RM100,000. This uneven distribution has raised eyebrows and fueled the sisters’ suspicions.
The trial kicked off with a dramatic twist when Datuk Low Beng Choo, the lawyer who drafted the will, took the stand. Low, also a defendant in the case, insisted that Siew Kim was ‘alert and aware’ when she signed the document page by page from her hospital bed. However, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, Datuk V. Sithambaram, swiftly objected, arguing that parts of Low’s testimony constituted inadmissible hearsay. Here’s the kicker: the plaintiffs allege that Low had a vested interest in the estate due to her ties to the Dikim Foundation, a claim she denies. High Court judge Mahazan Mat Taib has set March 2 to rule on this objection.
This case isn’t just about money—it’s about trust, family legacy, and the integrity of legal processes. But here’s a thought-provoking question: If Siew Kim’s mental state was indeed compromised, should the earlier wills hold more weight? Or is this a calculated move by the daughters to reclaim what they believe is rightfully theirs? Share your thoughts in the comments—this is one saga where opinions are as divided as the inheritance itself.
