Henny Sutanto v Suriani Tani: Unlicensed Moneylending & Cheque Liability Dispute

In Henny Sutanto v Suriani Tani and Chandra Suwandi, the High Court of Singapore heard a claim by Henny Sutanto (plaintiff) against Suriani Tani (first defendant) for $670,000 in friendly loans and against Chandra Suwandi (second defendant) as the drawer of three cheques totaling $515,000. The plaintiff had obtained a default judgment against the first defendant. Lai Siu Chiu J dismissed the plaintiff's claim against the second defendant, finding the plaintiff to be an unlicensed moneylender and the default judgment against the first defendant to be irregular. The court found that the second defendant was not liable as the plaintiff had failed to comply with various conditions of the Bills of Exchange Act.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs and the default judgment she had obtained against the first defendant was set aside as irregular.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Friendly loan dispute. Court held plaintiff was an unlicensed moneylender, making her claim unenforceable. Claim against second defendant dismissed.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Henny SutantoPlaintiffIndividualClaim DismissedLost
Suriani Tani (alias Li Yu)DefendantIndividualDefault Judgment Set AsideWon
Chandra Suwandi t/a Global Standard MarketingDefendantIndividualJudgment for DefendantWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lee Mun HooiLee Mun Hooi and Co
Wong Nan SheeLee Mun Hooi and Co
Quek Mong HuaLee and Lee
Julian TayLee and Lee

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff lent $670,000 to the first defendant between October 2001 and June 2003.
  2. The first defendant issued three cheques drawn on Global's account totaling $515,000 to the plaintiff.
  3. The first defendant was an authorized signatory of Global's UOB account.
  4. The first defendant stopped payment on the three cheques.
  5. The plaintiff did not present the cheques for payment.
  6. The plaintiff received $97,000 in repayments from the first defendant.
  7. The first defendant was the sister-in-law of the second defendant.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Henny Sutanto v Suriani Tani (alias Li Yu) and Another, Suit 275/2003, [2005] SGHC 82

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Plaintiff moved to Singapore.
First defendant came to live in Singapore.
First defendant was made an authorised signatory of Global’s UOB account.
Plaintiff extended first loan of $200,000 to first defendant.
Plaintiff extended second loan of $150,000 to first defendant.
Plaintiff extended third loan of $150,000 to first defendant.
$40,000 was credited to the OCBC bank account of the first defendant’s son, Kenward Suwandi.
First defendant issued cheque no 281249 for $206,000.
First defendant issued cheque no 021297 for $154,500.
First defendant instructed UOB to stop payment on the three cheques.
First defendant issued cheque no 021300 for $154,500.
Plaintiff extended fourth loan of $120,000 to first defendant.
$120,000 credited to the first defendant’s DBS Bank account.
First defendant credited $3,600 to the plaintiff’s DBS account.
Plaintiff extended fifth loan of $30,000 to first defendant.
First defendant left Singapore.
Second defendant revoked first defendant's mandate with UOB.
Plaintiff's solicitors sent a letter of demand to the second defendant.
Plaintiff sued the second defendant.
Plaintiff obtained judgment in default of appearance against the first defendant.
Plaintiff extended sixth loan of $20,000 to first defendant.
Power of attorney from the plaintiff to three Indonesian lawyers was created.
Agreement between Ivy and Ivy’s husband and the plaintiff was entered into.
Settlement agreement between the plaintiff and the second defendant was created.
Judgment was delivered.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Moneylending
    • Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff was an unlicensed moneylender, rendering her claim unenforceable under the Moneylenders Act.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Liability on Cheques
    • Outcome: The court held that the second defendant was not liable on the cheques because the plaintiff was not a holder in due course, no consideration was provided, and the cheques were not presented for payment.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Claim on Cheques

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Banking Law

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Subramaniam Dhanapakiam v GhaanthimathiHigh CourtYes[1991] SLR 432SingaporeCited for the principle that giving loans to friends does not constitute the business of moneylending unless there is a system and continuity about the transactions.
Litchfield v DreyfusKing's Bench DivisionYes[1906] 1 KB 584England and WalesCited to support the principle that obliging friends with loans does not constitute carrying on the business of a moneylender.
Reckitt v Barnett, Pembroke and Slater, LimitedHouse of LordsYes[1929] AC 176England and WalesCited for the principle that a drawer is not liable if cheques are not drawn for authorised purposes.
R E Jones, Limited v Waring and Gillow, LimitedHouse of LordsYes[1926] AC 670England and WalesCited for the principle that the original payee of a cheque is not a holder in due course.
Info-communications Development Authority of Singapore v Singapore Telecommunications Ltd (No 2)Court of AppealYes[2002] 3 SLR 488SingaporeCited regarding compromise and/or accord and satisfaction.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Bills of Exchange Act (Cap 23, 1999 Rev Ed)Singapore
Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Friendly Loans
  • Unlicensed Moneylender
  • Bills of Exchange
  • Holder in Due Course
  • Presentment
  • Consideration
  • Global Standard Marketing

15.2 Keywords

  • moneylending
  • bills of exchange
  • cheques
  • loans
  • singapore
  • high court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Bills of Exchange Law85
Money and moneylenders75
Banking Law40
Friendly Loans35
Contract Law30

16. Subjects

  • Banking
  • Finance
  • Civil Litigation