Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Inquiry into Estate Assets & Breach of Trust

In Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal arising from an inquiry into the assets of the estate of Ong Seng King. Jane Rebecca Ong, the appellant, contested the Assistant Registrar's findings regarding the valuation and inclusion of certain assets in the estate, alleging breaches of trust by Lim Lie Hoa, the administrator. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's decision that the inquiry was properly conducted and that the Assistant Registrar's findings were supported by the evidence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding an inquiry into the assets of Ong Seng King's estate. The court addressed issues of breach of trust and asset valuation.

1.7 Decision Date

18 January 2005

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Ong Jane Rebecca	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Andre Arul of Arul Chew and Partners
Lim Lie Hoa	Respondent	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Won	Khoo Boo Jin of Wee Swee Teow and Co Daniel Tan of Wee Swee Teow and Co
Ong Siauw Ping	Respondent	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Neutral	Chua Sui Tong of Shook Lin and Bok Vinodh S Coomaraswamy of Shook Lin and Bok
Ong Keng Tong	Respondent	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Neutral	Chua Sui Tong of Shook Lin and Bok Vinodh S Coomaraswamy of Shook Lin and Bok

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Lai Kew Chai	Judge	No
Judith Prakash	Judge	Yes
Yong Pung How	Chief Justice	No

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Andre Arul	Arul Chew and Partners
Khoo Boo Jin	Wee Swee Teow and Co
Daniel Tan	Wee Swee Teow and Co
Chua Sui Tong	Shook Lin and Bok
Vinodh S Coomaraswamy	Shook Lin and Bok

4. Facts

The deceased, Ong Seng King, died intestate in 1974, leaving substantial assets.
Lim Lie Hoa, the deceased's wife, was the administrator of the estate.
S T Ong, the deceased's son, assigned half of his interest in the estate to Jane Ong.
A deed of release by which S T Ong relinquished his rights to the estate was found to be void due to undue influence.
An inquiry was ordered to determine the assets of the estate and S T Ong's share.
Jane Ong alleged that Mdm Lim had committed breaches of trust in administering the estate.
Disputes arose over the inclusion and valuation of various assets in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Europe.

5. Formal Citations

Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa and Others, CA 58/2004, [2005] SGCA 4

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1974-10-01	Ong Seng King died intestate.
1978-07-01	Fresh letters of administration were granted to Lim Lie Hoa and S T Ong.
1982-10-01	S T Ong married Jane Rebecca Ong in England.
1988-03-01	Jane Ong petitioned for divorce.
1989-06-01	S T Ong executed a deed of release.
1990-10-01	S T Ong decided to co-operate with Jane Ong.
1991-08-01	S T Ong executed a deed of assignment to Jane Ong.
1991-09-21	Originating Summons (OS 939/1991) was filed.
1996-07-16	Chao Hick Tin J found the deed of release void.
1997-04-16	Court of Appeal dismissed appeals against Chao J’s findings.
1999-12-23	Anton Piller orders executed.
2002-02-01	S P Ong and K T Ong applied to be added as defendants.
2002-10-01	Inquiry commenced.
2003-06-30	AR Phang dealt with the issue of costs.
2004-01-01	Appeals to the High Court.
2005-01-19	Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

Breach of Trust
- Outcome: The court declined to make a finding of breach of trust in the context of the inquiry.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Mixing of trust funds with personal funds
  - Misapplication of estate funds
- Related Cases:
  - [2002] 3 SLR 241
  - (1880) 13 Ch D 696
  - [1903] 2 Ch 356
Valuation of Estate Assets
- Outcome: The court upheld the Assistant Registrar's valuation of the estate assets.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Undervaluation of properties
  - Inclusion of assets in estate
Scope of Inquiry
- Outcome: The court determined that the inquiry was correctly conducted as a common account, not on the basis of wilful default.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Whether inquiry should be on the basis of wilful default
  - Admissibility of evidence

8. Remedies Sought

Account of estate assets
Determination of beneficiary shares
Inquiry into assets

9. Cause of Actions

Breach of Trust
Accounting

10. Practice Areas

Litigation
Trust Litigation
Estate Administration

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa	High Court	Yes	[2003] SGHC 126	Singapore	Refers to the High Court decision being appealed.
Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa	High Court	Yes	[2004] SGHC 131	Singapore	Refers to the High Court decision being appealed.
Lim Lie Hoa v Ong Jane Rebecca	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1997] 2 SLR 320	Singapore	Cited for the Court of Appeal's earlier decision on the validity of the deed of assignment.
Caltong (Australia) Pty Ltd v Tong Tien See Construction Pte Ltd	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2002] 3 SLR 241	Singapore	Cited for the principle that when a trustee mixes trust funds with their own, the whole is subject to the trust.
In re Hallett’s Estate	Court of Appeal	Yes	(1880) 13 Ch D 696	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that a trustee is presumed to have drawn on their own funds first when purchasing an asset from a mixed fund.
Browne v Dunn	House of Lords	Yes	(1893) 6 R 67	United Kingdom	Cited for the rule that any matter upon which it is proposed to contradict the evidence-in-chief given by a witness must generally be put to him so that he may have an opportunity to explain the contradiction.
Dr Lo Sook Ling Adela v Au Mei Yin Christina	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2002] 1 SLR 408	Singapore	Cited in relation to the application of the rule in Browne v Dunn.
Peh Eng Leng v Pek Eng Leong	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1996] 2 SLR 305	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court must be slow to interfere with findings of fact unless plainly wrong.
Job v Job	High Court of Chancery	Yes	(1877) 6 Ch D 562	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that if wilful default is charged and proved, accounts and inquiries on that footing may be directed at any stage of the proceedings.
Mayer v Murray	Court of Appeal	Yes	(1878) 8 Ch D 424	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that if wilful default is charged and proved, accounts and inquiries on that footing may be directed at any stage of the proceedings.
In re Symons	High Court of Justice	Yes	[1882] 21 Ch D 757	England and Wales	Cited regarding the administration of an estate and allegations of breach of trust.
Sleight v Lawson	High Court of Chancery	Yes	(1857) 3 K & J 292	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that before an inquiry on the basis of wilful default can be ordered, the plaintiff must allege and prove at least one act of wilful neglect or default.
Frith v Cartland	High Court of Chancery	Yes	(1865) 2 H & M 417	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that when a trustee mixes trust funds with his own funds, the whole is subject to the trust, except so far as the trustee is able to distinguish what is his own.
In re Tilley’s Will Trusts	Chancery Division	Yes	[1967] 1 Ch 1179	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that when a trustee mixes trust funds with his own funds, the whole is subject to the trust, except so far as the trustee is able to distinguish what is his own.
In re Oatway, Hertslet v Oatway	High Court of Justice	Yes	[1903] 2 Ch 356	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that if the trustee can be shown to have made an early application of the mixed fund into an investment, the beneficiary is entitled to claim that for himself.
Shalson v Russo	High Court of Justice	Yes	[2003] EWHC 1637	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that a beneficiary can 'pick and choose' which particular sums were expended from estate moneys and which from the trustee's own funds when money from a mixed fund is used to pay for property.
Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa	High Court	Yes	[1996] SGHC 140	Singapore	Cited for the High Court's finding that the deed of release was void and unenforceable.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Intestate Succession Act (Cap 146, 1985 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 1990 Rev Ed), O 18 r 15(1)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Estate
Trust
Beneficiary
Administrator
Inquiry
Deed of Release
Deed of Assignment
Wilful Default
Common Account
Assets
Valuation
Breach of Trust
Mixing of Funds

15.2 Keywords

Estate
Trust
Beneficiary
Singapore
Appeal
Assets
Breach of Trust

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Estate Administration	90
Estate Law	90
Trusts and Estates	80
Succession Law	80
Trust Law	70
Inheritance Law	70
Civil Practice	60
Wills and Probate	60
Litigation	50
Equity	50
Fiduciary Duties	40
Civil Litigation	40
Chancery and Equity	40
Evidence Law	30
Procedural Law	30
Law of Pleadings	20
Contracts	20
Appellate Practice	20
Undue Influence	20
Deeds	10
Commercial Law	10
Property Law	10
Costs	10
Estoppel	10
Contract Law	10
Administrative Law	10
Insolvency Law	5
Family Law	5
Corporate Litigation	5
Breach of Contract	5
Bankruptcy	5
Affidavits	5

16. Subjects

Trusts
Probate and Administration
Civil Procedure
Estate Law