The estate in question belongs to the late Lim Siew Kim, the third child of the deceased gaming mogul, which is currently managed by the so-called administrators pendente lite for more than two years amid an ongoing family dispute over the validity of her will.
KUALA LUMPUR (Feb 25): A bid to remove the administrators overseeing a RM1.6 billion inheritance belonging to the late daughter of the Genting founder was hit by a preliminary objection in the court on Wednesday (Feb 25).
B Thangaraj, counsel for the court-appointed officers to manage the estate, argued in the High Court that portions of written submissions filed by Marcus Chan Jau Chwen, the grandson of Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong, contained fresh factual allegations that were not pleaded in affidavit evidence.
“You cannot just put in documents and then make submissions from that,” Thangaraj told the court, arguing that allegations relating to the operation of trust accounts, payment structures and purported misconduct must be properly deposed in affidavits to enable a response.
“There must be no element of surprise,” he said.
The estate in question belongs to the late Lim Siew Kim, the third child of the deceased gaming mogul, which is currently managed by the so-called administrators pendente lite for more than two years amid an ongoing family dispute over the validity of her will.
The administrators are Datuk Satharuban Sivasubramaniam, a practising lawyer, and Khoo Siew Kiat of Deloitte Malaysia, appointed by the High Court on Nov 27, 2023.
The estate came under their administration after two of Siew Kim’s daughters — Chan T’shiao Li and Kimberly Chan T’shiao Miin — filed a probate suit on Jan 19, 2023, challenging the validity of a will purportedly executed on April 28 last year.
The granddaughters contended that their mother died without a will. Her estate is cumulatively estimated to be worth in the region of RM1.6 billion. In that suit, Chan himself was named as the third defendant.
Chan, who is the only son of Lim Siew Kim and a 30% beneficiary of the residuary estate, is seeking the removal of both administrators. He is also applying to be appointed as replacement administrator, either solely or jointly with his sister Cressa Chan T’shiao Yunn, with powers limited to preserving the estate and its assets.
In his application, Chan alleges misconduct and non-compliance with the court order in the appointment of the administrators.
Among his complaints are that certain payments were allegedly made to solicitors and other parties from individual bank accounts rather than consolidated trust accounts, that estate funds were depleted through wrongful payments, and that the administrators interfered in the management of companies linked to the estate.
He further alleged that the administrators had nearly caused the estate to pay RM4.73 million in assessments on behalf of Prominview Sdn Bhd despite the liability allegedly resting with a joint venture partner. Other complaints include the lodging of private caveats and undertaking property valuations despite having no authority to distribute or dispose of estate assets.
The High Court had, on Sept 30, 2025, granted Chan leave to proceed with his removal and injunction applications. The administrators appealed against that decision, but the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on Jan 8, 2026, while affirming the High Court’s ruling.
Chan obtained on Jan 23, 2026, an ad interim injunction restraining the administrators from acting for the estate pending disposal of the removal application.
Trial by ambush
Responding to the preliminary objection on Wednesday, senior counsel for Chan, Datuk Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin, rejected the contention that the submissions amounted to trial by ambush.
“We have already stated in the affidavit, not in the written submission — in the affidavit itself,” he said, referring to payments allegedly made from specific bank accounts.
“We are not just going to refer to the document. We are going to draw from that document the inconsistencies and how it relates to the issue of misconduct,” he added.
Also present at Wednesday’s hearing were Goik Kenwayne and Foong Kar Yee for Chan; Rishwant Singh and Chia Eng Yi for the first defendant Malcolm Fernandes; and Ong Kheng Leong and Ong Yu Jian for the second defendant Chan Mei Yee.
Kamarul Hisham also raised an issue during the hearing concerning whether certain acts undertaken by the administrators were valid in the absence of letters of administration, describing it as a pure question of law.
“Our assertion is … when you perform acts as administrators without letters of administration, all of your acts are illegal and a nullity,” he submitted while acknowledging that the administrators’ counsel could be given time to respond.
Wednesday’s hearing had been fixed for the removal application. However, the court indicated that it would first determine the preliminary objection before proceeding further.
Judicial Commissioner Mahazan Mat Taib said she will deliver her ruling on Feb 26 on the objection before deciding whether to proceed with the substantive removal application.