Wan Badaruddin bin Che Wan Basor Ali v CIMB Bank Bhd & Anor
A name on a joint bank account is often mistaken as an automatic ticket to ownership when one party passes away. When the bank allows the surviving account holder to withdraw the money, it is immediately assumed to be legally theirs. Add a survivorship clause, and many think the story ends there.
In reality, ownership of money is not determined by assumptions, bank forms, or withdrawal convenience — but by legal principles far stricter than that.
This case involves an elderly man, whom we’ll call Mr Ahmad. At the age of 82, he opened a joint fixed deposit account at a conventional bank and named his close friend, Mr Bakri, as the joint account holder. Their relationship was close. Trust existed. There were no additional documents. No written hibah (gift). Everything relied solely on the structure of the bank account.
When Mr Ahmad passed away, the situation changed immediately. His family stepped in and instructed that all accounts be frozen. The estate administrator began carrying out their duties — and that is where the conflict began.
Mr Bakri claimed that the money in the account belonged to him. His reasoning was simple: the bank contract stated that the surviving account holder was entitled to the balance. From his perspective, the issue was straightforward — the bank allowed it, the clause was clear, the money was his.
The estate administrator saw it differently. To them, the money remained the deceased’s property. It had to form part of the estate and be distributed to the heirs according to faraid. A joint account, in their view, was merely an administrative mechanism — not conclusive proof of ownership.
The bank found itself caught in the middle. It refused to release the funds to either party until the court determined the true owner. When the matter reached court, it became more than just a dispute over money. It turned into a collision between two legal systems — civil law and Syariah law.
The court affirmed that matters of inheritance and estate administration fall within the jurisdiction of the Civil High Court. While the Syariah Court may determine who the rightful heirs are through a faraid certificate, the actual execution and management of the estate remain under the Civil Court’s authority.
However, the case became more complex when Mr Bakri himself described the money as a “sincere gift” from the deceased. With that single phrase, the entire narrative shifted. Once the money was framed as a gift or hibah, the court held that its validity could not be determined by the Civil Court. It had to be decided by the Syariah Court, because hibah is a concept governed by Islamic law.
At the same time, the court drew a clear distinction regarding the bank contract. The interpretation of the survivorship clause and the bank’s obligations remained a civil law issue. The bank is a corporate entity, not a subject of Syariah law. Therefore, it is governed by contract law, not Islamic law.
What is most significant about this case is the court’s stance on “speaking from both sides.” The court made it clear that a person cannot, at the same time, rely on a civil contract to claim the money and then label the same money as hibah when challenged. Once it is called hibah, the implications are serious — it must satisfy all the pillars and conditions of a valid hibah under Islamic law.
Ultimately, the Civil Court stayed the proceedings and referred the issue of hibah to the Syariah Court first. Only after the Syariah Court determines whether the hibah is valid will the Civil Court decide the final ownership of the money.
This case serves as a stark reminder. Joint accounts may simplify transactions, but they are not an absolute shield. Bank documents may allow withdrawals, but they do not necessarily extinguish the rights of other heirs. When a deceased person’s true intentions are not properly documented, conflict is almost inevitable.
Lesson learned: In estate planning, intention without structure is an invitation to dispute. And in inheritance law, the person who can withdraw the money is not necessarily the true owner. If you rely solely on a joint account, you are gambling with your family’s peace after you’re gone.
