Lee Hiok Tng v Lee Hiok Tng: Determination of Rights to Overseas Union Bank Shares Gifted from Estate of Lee Wee Nam
In Lee Hiok Tng and Another v Lee Hiok Tng (in his personal capacity) and Others, the High Court of Singapore addressed the determination of rights concerning 27 Overseas Union Bank (OUB) shares gifted from Nam to Tng. The plaintiffs, Lee Hiok Tng and Lee Hiok Woon, as Executors and Trustees of the Estate of Lee Wee Nam, sought the court's determination on the rights of the parties. The interveners, Lee Siew Choon, Lee Siew Hong, and Lee Siew Ngug, opposed the application, claiming abuse of process. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' application and the defendant's claim, finding that the shares belonged to Wee Kee Kongsi and that the defendant was attempting to re-litigate the matter.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs' application and the claim of the Defendant was dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court determined the rights to 27 Overseas Union Bank shares gifted from the Estate of Lee Wee Nam, finding the shares belonged to Wee Kee Kongsi and dismissing the defendant's claim.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee Siew Ngug | Interveners | Individual | Won | Won | |
| Lee Hiok Tng | Plaintiff, Defendant | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | |
| Lee Hiok Woon | Plaintiff | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | |
| Lee Siew Choon | Interveners | Individual | Won | Won | |
| Lee Siew Hong | Interveners | Individual | Won | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Amarjeet Singh | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Adrian Wong | Allen & Gledhill |
| Chan Hian Young | Allen & Gledhill |
| Malcom Lim | Tan & Lim |
4. Facts
- The 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs are Executors and Trustees of the Estate of Lee Wee Nam.
- The Defendant is sued in his personal capacity.
- The Interveners are beneficiaries of the Estate of Nam.
- The Plaintiffs sought determination of rights regarding a gift of 27 Overseas Union Bank shares.
- The Interveners opposed the application, claiming abuse of process.
- The court had previously decided that the 27 OUB shares belonged to Wee Kee Kongsi.
- The Defendant claimed the shares were a gift to him from his father.
5. Formal Citations
- Lee Hiok Tng and Another v Lee Hiok Tng (in his personal capacity) and Others, OS 571/1999, [2000] SGHC 192
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Lee Hum Chye founded the family fund Sze Teck Tng Chye Kee. | |
| The three brothers formed a partnership in Wee Kee Kongsi. | |
| The Estate of Kiat executed a Deed of Release with Kheng and Nam. | |
| Kheng and Nam incorporated Lee Brothers (Wee Kee) Ltd. | |
| Kheng passed away. | |
| Dissolution of Wee Kee Kongsi partnership due to Lee Wee Kheng's death. | |
| Nam gifted 27 Overseas Union Bank shares to Tng. | |
| Nam incorporated Lee Hiok Kee Pte Ltd. | |
| Nam incorporated Lee Investments Pte Ltd. | |
| Shares of Nam’s descendants in Lee Brothers were transferred to LHKPL. | |
| Transfer of 27 shares of $100 each in Overseas Union Bank Ltd by Lee Wee Nam to the third defendant. | |
| Nam passed away leaving a Will. | |
| Tng and Woon were granted probate of Nam's Will. | |
| Suit No. 1401 of 1973 was filed. | |
| Suit No. 2457 of 1981 was filed. | |
| Originating Summons No. 194 of 1982 was filed. | |
| Chao J issued judgment in the Consolidated Suit. | |
| Privy Council dismissed the appeals in the Consolidated Suit. | |
| Originating Summons 571/1999 was filed. | |
| Defendant's Affidavit was dated. | |
| Decision Date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Ownership of Shares
- Outcome: The court determined that the 27 OUB shares were the property of Wee Kee Kongsi, not a personal gift to the Defendant.
- Category: Substantive
- Abuse of Process
- Outcome: The court found that the Plaintiffs' application and the Defendant's claim constituted an abuse of the process of the court.
- Category: Procedural
- Res Judicata
- Outcome: The court held that the judgment of Chao J operated as an estoppel by record and as an issue estoppel against the Defendant.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Determination of Rights
- Indemnity
- Contribution
9. Cause of Actions
- Determination of Rights
- Breach of Trust
10. Practice Areas
- Estate Litigation
- Trust Litigation
11. Industries
- Banking
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee Hiok Tng and Another v Lee Hiok Tng (in his personal capacity) and Others | High Court | Yes | [2000] SGHC 192 | Singapore | This is the current case. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Overseas Union Bank shares
- Wee Kee Kongsi
- Estate of Lee Wee Nam
- Gift
- Abuse of process
- Res judicata
- Estoppel
- Executors
- Trustees
- Beneficiaries
15.2 Keywords
- shares
- trust
- estate
- gift
- abuse of process
- res judicata
- estoppel
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Trust Law | 85 |
| Estate Administration | 80 |
| Succession Law | 75 |
| Estoppel | 70 |
| Breach of Trust | 70 |
| Fiduciary Duties | 65 |
| Constructive Trust | 60 |
| Duty to Account | 60 |
| Gifts | 50 |
| Civil Procedure | 40 |
| Evidence | 35 |
| Undue Influence | 30 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Commercial Disputes | 25 |
| Company Law | 20 |
| Costs | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Trusts
- Estates
- Civil Procedure