JUDGMENT

[1] Leave was granted to the appellants to raise the following "questions of law" before this court:

(1) Whether a complaint of forgery in civil proceedings is necessarily in law a complaint of fraud?

(2) Whether it is correct in law for a court to treat a complaint of forgery as a complaint of fraud given the differing standards of proof presently in civil proceedings between forgery and fraud?

(3) Whether a case of forgery can only be proved by means of the opinion of a handwriting expert?

(4) Whether it is correct in law to cast the burden of proving that the sale of a property was not genuine on the plaintiff or alleged vendor?

(5) Arising from the question above, whether the correct position in law is that the burden of proving that he is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice is rightfully to be placed on the purchaser?

(6) Whether a bona fide purchaser for value can be registered as a proprietor of a land in a situation where a formal transmission from a deceased to a personal representative pursuant to s 346(5) of the National Land Code was not registered?