Australia and New Zealand Banking Group v Ding Pei Chai: Interpleader Relief and Authority to Operate Bank Account

In Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v Ding Pei Chai, the Singapore High Court addressed an interpleader action brought by ANZ Bank due to conflicting instructions from Ding Pei Chai, Phua Swee Khiang, and Cheng Wai Yong regarding the operation of an Asian Currency Unit deposit account held by Gracedale Technology Limited. The court, presided over by Belinda Ang Saw Ean J, found that Lee Wan Hoi had agreed to cede control of Gracedale and the ACU account to Ding and Phua, but was unable to determine if the issuing of additional bearer shares and the resolution to remove Lee and Cheng as authorised signatories were in accordance with the articles of association and the laws of the British Virgin Islands. The court ordered the funds to be retained in the account pending further orders.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Orders made for the moneys in the ACU deposit account to be retained in the account until further order. Both parties are to have general liberty to apply in connection with the order made pursuant to this judgment.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

High Court case regarding conflicting instructions for an Asian Currency Unit deposit account, focusing on who has the authority to operate the account.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Phua Swee KhiangRespondentIndividualPartialPartial
Ding Pei ChaiRespondentIndividualPartialPartial
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group LtdApplicantCorporationNeutralNeutral
Cheng Wai YongRespondentIndividualPartialPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Carrie Ho Nyuk TsienJC Ho and Kang LLC
S SelvamRamdas and Wong
J BalachandranRamdas and Wong

4. Facts

  1. ANZ Bank sought interpleader relief due to conflicting instructions regarding the operation of an ACU account.
  2. Gracedale Technology Limited is the account holder of the ACU account with ANZ Bank.
  3. Ding, Phua, and Cheng gave conflicting instructions to ANZ Bank regarding the ACU account.
  4. Lee, Ding, and Phua were business associates and friends who invested in properties in Melbourne.
  5. A$1.8m was transferred to the ACU account as a provision to meet potential claims.
  6. Ding and Phua proposed to Lee to set aside and transfer A$1.8m to the joint custody of the three of them.
  7. Lee agreed to give Ding and Phua control of Gracedale and the ACU account pending the production of the accounts of SEPLT and SPT.

5. Formal Citations

    6. Timeline

    DateEvent
    The Deputy Registrar framed the interpleader issue.
    The interpleader proceedings came on for trial.
    Lee agreed to set up the ACU account.
    Lee and Cheng passed a resolution removing the entire board of directors and appointing themselves directors of the trustee company.
    Ding and Phua decided to remove Cheng as a director of Gracedale and withdraw Lee and Cheng as authorised signatories of the ACU account.
    A resolution was passed to ratify and adopt their decision of 7 March 2002.
    Ding and Phua handed to ANZ Bank a copy of the May resolution with instructions to observe the change of signatories on its record to Ding and Phua.
    The Melbourne properties were sold.
    The amount of A$1.8m was transferred to the ACU account.
    A total of 144 new bearer shares were issued.
    Decision Date

    7. Legal Issues

    1. Authority to operate bank account
      • Outcome: Court found that Lee had agreed to give Ding and Phua control of Gracedale and the ACU account pending the production of the accounts of SEPLT and SPT.
      • Category: Substantive
    2. Interpleader
      • Outcome: Court addressed an interpleader action brought by ANZ Bank due to conflicting instructions from Ding Pei Chai, Phua Swee Khiang, and Cheng Wai Yong regarding the operation of an Asian Currency Unit deposit account held by Gracedale Technology Limited.
      • Category: Procedural

    8. Remedies Sought

    1. Interpleader relief

    9. Cause of Actions

    • No cause of actions

    10. Practice Areas

    • Civil Litigation

    11. Industries

    • Banking
    • Finance

    12. Cited Cases

    Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
    De La Rue v Hernu, Peron & Stockwell, LimitedKBYes[1936] 2 KB 164England and WalesCited to explain that an interpleader issue is a means for the court to decide the claims as between the persons present at the proceedings in order that the person interpleading may get the relief to which he is entitled.
    BP Benzin und Petroleum AG v European-American Banking CorporationN/AYes[1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 364N/ACited for the principle that the jurisdiction of the court under O 17 r 8 of the Rules of Court allows the court to make such order as it thinks fit in the matter, even though it interferes with the rights of the parties, if it is for the just solution of the case.

    13. Applicable Rules

    Rule Name
    O 17 r 8 of the Rules of Court

    14. Applicable Statutes

    Statute NameJurisdiction
    Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
    Australian Corporations Act 2001 s 293Australia
    Australian Corporations Act 2001 s 290(1)Australia

    15. Key Terms and Keywords

    15.1 Key Terms

    • Interpleader
    • ACU account
    • Bearer shares
    • Trustee company
    • Melbourne properties
    • Authorised signatories

    15.2 Keywords

    • Interpleader
    • Bank account
    • Authority
    • Conflicting instructions
    • Gracedale Technology Limited

    17. Areas of Law

    Area NameRelevance Score
    Interpleader80
    Civil Practice75
    Company Law70
    Contract Law65
    Banking and Finance60
    Arbitration20

    16. Subjects

    • Civil Procedure
    • Banking Law