Ong Yew Kew v Re Lot 114-69 Mukim 22: Adverse Possession Against Charitable Trust & Land Title Dispute

In Re Lot 114-69 Mukim 22, the High Court of Singapore heard an application by Ong Yew Kew for declarations relating to adverse possession of land. The Attorney General opposed the application on behalf of a charitable trust. Tay Yong Kwang JC found that Ong Yew Kew had established adverse possession for over 12 years before 1 March 1994 and granted the orders sought. The court held that the Limitation Act applies to charitable trusts and that the Attorney General could have brought an action on behalf of the trust.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Ong Yew Kew sought adverse possession of land against a charitable trust. The court found Ong had proven adverse possession, allowing his claim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Attorney-GeneralRespondentGovernment AgencyApplication DismissedLost
Asanthi S Mendis of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Ong Yew KewApplicantIndividualApplication AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tay Yong KwangJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Asanthi S MendisAttorney-General’s Chambers
Cavinder BullDrew & Napier

4. Facts

  1. Ong Yew Kew sought a declaration that he was entitled to possession of land.
  2. The land was previously owned by Lim Kit Fah, who sold it to five purchasers as joint tenants and trustees in 1920.
  3. A Chinese temple, Kew Ong Yah Temple, was built on part of the property in 1921.
  4. Ong Yew Kew's grandfather was one of the original trustees of the temple.
  5. Ong Yew Kew has lived on the property since his birth in 1934, except for a period when he studied in Australia.
  6. Ong Yew Kew's family has maintained exclusive possession of the property for decades.
  7. The Attorney General objected to the application, arguing that the temple should be registered as a charity.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Re Lot 114-69 Mukim 22, Singapore and another action, OS 569/1984 And 955/1996, [2001] SGHC 79

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Lim Kit Fah sold the property to five purchasers.
Kew Ong Yah Temple was built on part of the property.
Ong Choo Kee died.
Goh Chin Kee appointed Lim Kit Fah and Choong Swee Nyong as new trustees.
Ong Yew Kew was born.
Ong Chin Hua died.
Goh Chin Kee died.
The 1933 indenture was registered.
Choong Swee Nyong died.
Ong Yew Kew began studying in Australia.
Lim Kit Fah issued a writ of summons against Ong Yew Kew's brother.
Ong Yew Kew returned from Australia.
Ong Yew Kew's brother passed away.
Ong Yew Kew's mother died.
Lim Kit Fah died.
A certificate of abatement was filed by Lim Kit Fah's solicitors.
Ong Yew Kew made a Statutory Declaration for a Claim of Long Possession.
Ong Yew Kew granted an equitable mortgage of the property to Ong Oon Teck.
Indenture of Reassignment was executed.
Ong Yew Kew lodged a caveat against the property in the Registry of Deeds.
Originating Summons 569/84 was commenced.
Originating Summons 569/84 was last adjourned sine die.
Lot 114-69pt Mukim 22 was acquired.
The possessory owner lodged an appeal against this award with the Appeals Board (Land Acquisition).
Originating Summons 955/96 was filed.
A supplementary award of $1,322,906.85 (including interest) was made.
Originating Summons 569/84 was restored for hearing.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Adverse Possession
    • Outcome: The court found that the applicant had proven adverse possession for more than 12 years before 1 March 1994.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Factual possession
      • Intention to exclude
      • Continuous possession
  2. Charitable Trust
    • Outcome: The court held that the Limitation Act applies to charitable trusts and that the Attorney General could have brought an action on behalf of the trust.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Whether adverse possession may be obtained against charitable trust
      • Whether 'person' who may bring action to recover land includes charitable trust
      • Whether Attorney General may bring action to recover land on behalf of charitable trust which had no surviving trustee
      • Whether charitable trust bound by limitation statute
  3. Limitation Act Interpretation
    • Outcome: The court held that 'any person' in s 9(1) of the Limitation Act could include the Attorney General suing on behalf of the charitable trust.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Interpretation of 'any person' in s 9(1) of the Limitation Act
      • Application of Limitation Act to equitable interests in land

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Declaration of entitlement to possession
  2. Vesting of rights and title
  3. Registration of orders and declarations
  4. Declaration of title by adverse possession

9. Cause of Actions

  • Adverse Possession
  • Declaration of Title

10. Practice Areas

  • Real Estate Law
  • Trusts and Estates
  • Charity Law
  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Haji Salleh bin Haji Ismail v Haji Abdullah bin Haji Mohamed SallehSingapore Supreme CourtYes[1935] SSLR 5SingaporeCited for the principle that usage constitutes presumptive evidence of dedication to charitable trusts.
Hussey v PalmerN/ANo[1972] 3 All ER 744N/ACited for the equitable principles to impose a constructive trust.
Wallis`s Cayton Bay Holiday Camp v Shell-Mex and BPN/AYes[1975] QB 94N/ACited for the principle that possession by itself is not enough to give title; it must be adverse possession.
President and Governors of Magdalen Hospital v KnottsN/AYes[1879] 4 App Cas 324N/ADemonstrates that a charity could be barred by limitation from recovering possession of its land.
Balwant Singh v Double L & TCourt of AppealYes[1996] 2 SLR 726SingaporeCited as a good exegesis of the 1993 Land Titles Act.
Soon Peng Yam v Maimon bte AhmadN/AYes[1996] 2 SLR 609N/ACited for the definition of adverse possession.
Jubilee Electronics v Tai Wah Garments & Knitting FactoryN/AYes[1996] 2 SLR 39N/ACited for the principle that the 12-year period necessary to establish title by adverse possession can be constituted by the aggregate of separate but continuous periods of adverse possession by different people.
President, etc of St Mary Magdalen, Oxford v A-GN/AYes[1857] 6 HL Cas 189N/ACited as another case which shows that limitation statutes could and did run against charities and could operate to bar actions brought by the Attorney General on the charity`s behalf.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Limitation Act (Cap 163, 1996 Ed)Singapore
Land Acquisition Act (Cap 152)Singapore
Land Titles Act 1993Singapore
Charities Act (Cap 37, 1995 Ed)Singapore
Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 1999 Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Adverse possession
  • Charitable trust
  • Limitation Act
  • Factual possession
  • Intention to exclude
  • Trustees
  • Originating summons
  • Kew Ong Yah Temple

15.2 Keywords

  • Adverse possession
  • Charitable trust
  • Land dispute
  • Singapore
  • Property law
  • Limitation Act

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Adverse Possession95
Property Law90
Limitation85
Trust Law75
Charitable Giving60
Civil Procedure40
Administrative Law30
Wills and Probate20

16. Subjects

  • Land Law
  • Trust Law
  • Charity Law
  • Adverse Possession