Dispute Resolution Update: Can Faith Stand in the Way of Inheritance? The Court of Appeal on Muslim Beneficiaries of Non-Muslim Estates
In Wee Ku Wing v Amira Umaira Teng binti Abdullah1, the Court of Appeal considered whether a daughter who had converted to Islam could benefit from the estate of her deceased non-Muslim father.
The Respondent had been excluded from the distribution of her father’s estate, on the basis that she had converted to Islam and therefore subject to her personal law. The Land Administrator granted the Small Estate Distribution Order on 9 August 2023 (“the Order”).
The Respondent subsequently challenged the Order by way of an Originating Summons before the High Court. The High Court set aside the Order, finding that the Respondent was a “child” and beneficiary within the meaning of section 3 of the Distribution Act 1958 (“the Act”).
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision, holding that the Act applies to the estate of a non-Muslim deceased and contains no provision disqualifying a Muslim child from benefiting from such an estate2. Importantly, the Court clarified that it is the religion of the deceased, rather than that of the beneficiary, which determines the statutory regime governing the estate.
The decision also raises an important question concerning the role of religious norms in determining civil rights. The Court reaffirmed the Federal Court principles laid down in Iki Putra Mubarak v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor3 and Nik Elin Zurina binti Nik Abdul Rashid & Anor v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan4, emphasising that while hadith (sayings or traditions of Prophet Muhammad PBUH) and fatwas (formal legal opinion by a religious authority) may be significant as matters of faith for the Muslims, uncodified religious norms cannot override clear statutory provisions. The Court further held that the Federal Territories Fatwa relied upon by the Appellant had no binding effect in Kelantan and was of no legal relevance to the proceedings.
On procedure, the Court clarified that the Respondent, not having been made a party by the Appellant to the proceedings before the Land Administrator under the Small Estates (Distribution) Act 1955, was not in a position to and consequently could not invoke the statutory right of appeal under section 29(1) of the said Act to challenge the Order. Accordingly, the Respondent was not precluded from challenging the Order by way of an Originating Summons, rather than by way of an appeal to the High Court.
The Court of Appeal’s decision therefore provides useful clarity not only on the entitlement of a Muslim child to benefit from a non-Muslim parent’s estate, but also on the interaction between statutory succession law, religious norms and civil rights5.
Footnotes:
- [2026] CLJU 2741.
- The Court of Appeal’s Grounds of Judgment dated 23 July 2026 may be retrieved here.
- [2021] 2 MLJ 323.
- [2024] 3 CLJ 323.
- Reports on this case may be assessed below:
This update is prepared by Nurul Hafizah binti Melan.
Contact us for further information regarding Dispute Resolution matters.
COPYRIGHT © 2026 SHEARN DELAMORE & CO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
THIS UPDATE IS ISSUED FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE CLIENTS OF THE FIRM AND COVERS LEGAL ISSUES IN A GENERAL WAY.
THE CONTENTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE ANY ADVICE ON ANY SPECIFIC MATTER AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR DETAILED LEGAL ADVICE ON SPECIFIC MATTERS OR TRANSACTIONS.