Ong Cher Keong v Goh Chin Soon Ricky: Setting Aside Judgment, Account of Sums Due

In Ong Cher Keong v Goh Chin Soon Ricky, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute between Ong Cher Keong (plaintiff) and Goh Chin Soon Ricky (defendant) concerning a joint property development. The plaintiff sought an account of sums due from the defendant related to their joint venture agreement. The defendant appealed against orders related to the taking of accounts. The High Court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside one order and upholding another, and provided further directions for the taking of fresh accounts.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeals allowed in part.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Ong Cher Keong v Goh Chin Soon Ricky involves a dispute over a joint property development and the setting aside of court orders related to accounting for sums due. The High Court allowed the appeal in part.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ong Cher KeongPlaintiffIndividualAppeals allowed in partPartial
Goh Chin Soon RickyDefendant, AppellantIndividualAppeals allowed in partPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Judith PrakashJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Vernon VoonAbraham Low & Partners
Aloysius LengAbraham Low & Partners
Anthony NettoNetto & Netto
Anand ThiagarajanNetto & Netto

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff and defendant entered into a joint venture agreement in June 1995 to develop land.
  2. Plaintiff had a 30% share, and the defendant held the remaining 70% interest.
  3. Plaintiff paid the defendant $1,008,780 for his share in the joint venture.
  4. Defendant informed the plaintiff that the property had been sold to Taiwanese parties for $45m.
  5. Plaintiff requested an account of his 30% share but did not receive supporting documents.
  6. Defendant orally agreed to repay the plaintiff $4,386,365.69 by installments.
  7. The property was taken over by receivers appointed by the mortgagees.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ong Cher Keong v Goh Chin Soon Ricky, Suit 302/1998, [2001] SGHC 21

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Agreement entered into by plaintiff and defendant to jointly develop land.
Defendant informed plaintiff about the property sale to Taiwanese parties.
Defendant orally agreed to repay the plaintiff his 30% share by installments.
Plaintiff commenced action.
Summary judgment application heard; order for account to be taken.
Accounts taken by Assistant Registrar Eugene Teo.
Appeal allowed; judgment of 1 October 1998 set aside.
Clarification made by Assistant Registrar Audrey Lim.
Further hearing before Assistant Registrar Lim.
Orders made by Assistant Registrar Lim.
Further directions given regarding the sale of the property.
Property taken over by receivers.
Assistant Registrar Lim ordered directions for taking accounts upon completion of sale.
Receivers entered into a contract to sell the property.
Plaintiff received confirmation from receivers that they had been discharged.
Plaintiff wrote to the Registrar asking for restoration of hearing for directions for taking of accounts.
Orders made by the court in the absence of the defendant.
Application dismissed; Assistant Registrar Tan Wen Shan proceeded with taking of accounts.
Defendant became bankrupt.
Appeal relating to the order of 7 April 1999 dismissed but appeal in relation to the order of 3 February 2000 allowed.
Bankruptcy order against the defendant was rescinded.
Decision given which was substantially similar to that made previously except in relation to interest on the mortgage and interest on the amount to be found due.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Setting aside judgment or order of court
    • Outcome: The court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside one order and upholding another.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Mistake of fact
      • Mistake of law
      • Irregularity in obtaining order
      • Fraud in obtaining judgment
      • Default of appearance
  2. Accounting for sums due under joint venture agreement
    • Outcome: The court provided directions for the taking of fresh accounts to determine the sums due.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Determination of net sales proceeds
      • Attribution of mortgage costs
      • Calculation of interest

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Account of sums due
  2. Payment of sums due
  3. Interest on amount due

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Failure to Account

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Heng Joo See v Ho Pol LingHigh CourtYes[1993] 3 SLR 850SingaporeCited regarding the inherent jurisdiction of the court to rescind or set aside an order based on mistaken facts or law to prevent injustice.
Huddersfield Banking Co, Ltd v Henry Lister & Son LtdCourt of AppealYes[1895] 2 Ch 273England and WalesCited for the proposition that the court could set aside a consent order made on the basis of a mistake.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Joint venture agreement
  • Taking of accounts
  • Sale of property
  • Mortgage
  • Receivers
  • Consent order
  • Directions
  • Compromise agreement

15.2 Keywords

  • Joint venture
  • Accounting
  • Property development
  • Setting aside order
  • Breach of contract

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Judgments and Orders80
Civil Practice75
Breach of Contract60
Contract Law60
Fiduciary Duties50
Accounting and Inquiry40

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Contract Law
  • Joint Ventures
  • Accounting