Goh Kah Heng v Public Prosecutor: Falsification, Misappropriation & False Information to Charities Commissioner
Goh Kah Heng (alias Shi Ming Yi) and Raymond Yeung appealed against their conviction and sentence in the High Court of Singapore, after being found guilty in the District Court. Goh Kah Heng, the Chief Executive Officer of Ren Ci Hospital and Medicare Centre, faced charges including falsifying a payment voucher, misappropriating funds, and providing false information to the Commissioner of Charities. Raymond Yeung, Goh's personal executive, was charged with conspiracy to falsify documents and provide false information. The High Court dismissed the appeal against conviction for both Goh and Yeung, but allowed Goh's appeal against the sentence, reducing his imprisonment term. The court found that Goh and Yeung had conspired to misappropriate funds from Ren Ci and provided false information to cover up their actions.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Goh Kah Heng (Shi Ming Yi) and Raymond Yeung appeal convictions for falsifying documents, misappropriating funds, and providing false information to the Commissioner of Charities. The High Court upheld most convictions but reduced Goh's sentence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goh Kah Heng (alias Shi Ming Yi) | Appellant | Individual | Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part. | Partial | Andre Yeap, Hamidul Haq, Adrian Wong, Jansen Chow |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal dismissed in part. | Partial | Jaswant Singh, David Chew |
| Raymond Yeung Chi Hang | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Ng Lip Chih |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Andre Yeap | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Hamidul Haq | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Adrian Wong | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Jansen Chow | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Ng Lip Chih | NLC Law Asia LLP |
| Jaswant Singh | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| David Chew | Attorney-General's Chambers |
4. Facts
- Goh Kah Heng was the CEO and Chairman of Ren Ci Hospital.
- Raymond Yeung was Goh Kah Heng's personal executive.
- Raymond Yeung was not a staff of Ren Ci in May 2004.
- Raymond Yeung instructed Ren Ci's finance manager to prepare a cash cheque for $50,000 to Mandala.
- Goh Kah Heng signed the Cash Cheque and Payment Voucher.
- The $50,000 was never given to Mandala.
- Goh Kah Heng gave false evidence to the Inquiry that the $50,000 was a loan for Mandala to purchase wood.
- A letter from Bei Jing Jing Hai Shan Artifact Co Ltd was given to the Commissioner stating that it had delivered two statues worth $16,000 to Mandala.
5. Formal Citations
- Goh Kah Heng (alias Shi Ming Yi) v Public Prosecutor and another matter, MA Nos 333 and 332 of 2009 (DACs 31694 and 31688 of 2008 and Others), [2010] SGHC 167
- Public Prosecutor v Goh Kah Heng alias Shi Ming Yi and Another, , [2009] SGDC 499
- Public Prosecutor v Goh Kah Heng alias Shi Ming Yi and Another, , [2009] SGDC 500
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Goh Kah Heng met Raymond Yeung in Hong Kong. | |
| Raymond Yeung's application for an employment pass was rejected. | |
| Goh Kah Heng offered Raymond Yeung a job at Ren Ci. | |
| Goh Kah Heng and Raymond Yeung jointly bought a property in Melbourne, Australia. | |
| Raymond Yeung instructed Ren Ci's finance manager to prepare a cash cheque and payment voucher for $50,000 to Mandala Buddhist & Cultural Centre. | |
| Goh Kah Heng and Raymond Yeung jointly purchased a penthouse in Melbourne. | |
| Raymond Yeung's employment pass was approved. | |
| Goh Kah Heng donated $50,000 to Ren Ci. | |
| Ministry of Health initiated a corporate governance review of Ren Ci. | |
| Raymond Yeung paid $10,000 to Ren Ci. | |
| Raymond Yeung paid $40,000 to Ren Ci. | |
| Raymond Yeung tendered his resignation from Ren Ci. | |
| Raymond Yeung created the story that $50,000 had been used to purchase wood. | |
| Goh Kah Heng reimbursed Raymond Yeung $50,000. | |
| Ministry of Health initiated a formal inquiry into Ren Ci's affairs. | |
| Goh Kah Heng gave evidence to the members of the Inquiry that the $50,000 was a loan for Mandala to purchase wood. | |
| Commissioner of Charities asked Goh Kah Heng to provide documentary evidence of the purchase of wood. | |
| Goh Kah Heng provided a written statement to E & Y stating that the wood and Buddha statues were purchased from Bei Jing Jing Hai Shan Artifact Co Ltd. | |
| Raymond Yeung confessed to Goh Kah Heng about the loan. | |
| Bei Jing Jing Hai Shan Artifact Co Ltd letter was given to the Commissioner. | |
| Commercial Affairs Department conducted a raid on Ren Ci. | |
| Commercial Affairs Department called up Goh Kah Heng and Raymond Yeung for interviews. | |
| District Judge's decision in Public Prosecutor v Goh Kah Heng alias Shi Ming Yi and Another [2009] SGDC 499. | |
| District Judge's decision in Public Prosecutor v Goh Kah Heng alias Shi Ming Yi and Another [2009] SGDC 500. | |
| High Court decision date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Falsification of Accounts
- Outcome: The court found that Goh Kah Heng and Raymond Yeung conspired to falsify the payment voucher with the intent to defraud.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Intent to defraud
- Falsifying payment voucher
- Related Cases:
- [2006] SGDC 1
- Criminal Breach of Trust
- Outcome: The court found that Goh Kah Heng dishonestly misappropriated funds entrusted to him.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Dishonest misappropriation
- Entrustment of funds
- Related Cases:
- [1997] 1 SLR(R) 876
- Providing False Information to Commissioner of Charities
- Outcome: The court found that Goh Kah Heng knowingly provided false information to the Commissioner of Charities.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Knowingly providing false information
- Providing false information in purported compliance with Charities Act
- Abetment by Conspiracy
- Outcome: The court found that Goh Kah Heng and Raymond Yeung engaged in a conspiracy to falsify the Payment Voucher.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2000] 1 SLR(R) 604
- [1993] 3 SLR(R) 302
- [2000] 1 SLR(R) 756
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Falsification of Accounts
- Criminal Breach of Trust
- Providing False Information to Commissioner of Charities
- Conspiracy
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- Healthcare
- Non-Profit
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chua Yong Khiang Melvin v PP | High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR (R) 1108 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will defer to the trial judge's finding of fact unless plainly wrong. |
| PP v Hla Win | High Court | Yes | [1995] 2 SLR(R) 104 | Singapore | Cited as authority for the principle that an appellate court will defer to the trial judge's finding of fact. |
| Sundara Moorthy Lankatharan v PP | High Court | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR(R) 253 | Singapore | Cited as authority for the principle that an appellate court will defer to the trial judge's finding of fact. |
| Krishna Jayaram v PP | High Court | Yes | [1989] 2 SLR(R) 21 | Singapore | Cited as authority for the principle that an appellate court will defer to the trial judge's finding of fact. |
| Lee Yuen Hong v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 604 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements for the offence of abetment by conspiracy. |
| Public Prosecutor v Yeo Choon Poh | High Court | Yes | [1993] 3 SLR(R) 302 | Singapore | Cited for the method of proving a conspiracy by showing that the words and actions of the parties indicate their concert in the pursuit of a common object or design. |
| Er Joo Nguang and another v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 756 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that conspiracy is generally a matter of inference, deduced from certain acts of the accused parties, done in pursuance of an apparent criminal purpose in common between them. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chow Wai Lam | District Court | Yes | [2006] SGDC 1 | Singapore | Cited for the approach to defining 'intent to defraud' by examining all the facts and circumstances surrounding the relevant transaction. |
| Tan Tze Chye v PP | High Court | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR(R) 876 | Singapore | Cited for the elements required to constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust. |
| PP v Datuk Haji Harun bin Haji Idris | High Court | Yes | [1977] 1 MLJ 180 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that dishonesty in the context of criminal breach of trust is established even if the deprivation is temporary. |
| Knight v Public Prosecutor | High Court | No | [1992] 1 SLR 720 | Singapore | Cited regarding the 'clang of the prison gates' principle, but distinguished in its application to the present case. |
| T T Durai v Public Prosecutor | District Court | No | [2007] SGDC 334 | Singapore | Cited to argue for a lighter sentence based on the accused's contributions to society, but distinguished in the present case. |
| Wuu David v Public Prosecutor | High Court | No | [2008] 4 SLR 83 | Singapore | Cited to argue that shame and embarrassment can provide general deterrence, but distinguished in the present case. |
| Wong Tiew Yong and Another v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR(R) 325 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that abusing a position of eminence to commit offences takes the offender out of the exceptional category to whom the 'clang of the prison gates' principle applies. |
| Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR (R) 653 | Singapore | Cited for the circumstances in which an appellate court may correct sentences. |
| Whang Sung Lin v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2010] SGHC 53 | Singapore | Cited for the circumstances in which an appellate court may correct sentences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Siew Boon Loong | High Court | Yes | [2005] 1 SLR(R) 611 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of a manifestly excessive or inadequate sentence. |
| Balakrishnan S and another v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2005] 4 SLR(R) 249 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that abuse of authority and betrayal of trust are serious aggravating factors that might outweigh factors which would otherwise go towards mitigation. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code, Chapter 224 | Singapore |
| Charities Act, Chapter 37 | Singapore |
| Section 477A of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 109 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 406 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 10(1)(a) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 10(3) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 10(1)(b) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 107(b) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 405 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 24 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 23 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 3(1)(a) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 4(1) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 4(2) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 8 of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 8(2) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 8(3) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 8(4) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 9 of the Charities Act | Singapore |
| Section 10(4) of the Charities Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Ren Ci Hospital
- Mandala Buddhist Cultural Centre
- Commissioner of Charities
- Payment Voucher
- Bei Jing Jing Hai Shan Artifact Co Ltd
- Loan
- Falsification
- Misappropriation
- False Information
- Inquiry
- Cash Cheque
15.2 Keywords
- Goh Kah Heng
- Shi Ming Yi
- Raymond Yeung
- Ren Ci Hospital
- Charities Act
- Falsification
- Misappropriation
- Criminal Breach of Trust
- Singapore
- High Court
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Charities Law
- Abetment
- Conspiracy
- Falsification
- Criminal Breach of Trust
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Charities Law
- Conspiracy
- Criminal Breach of Trust
- Falsification of Accounts