New Dennis Arthur v Greesh Ghai Monty: Misrepresentation in Property Sale Dispute

In New Dennis Arthur and another v Greesh Ghai Monty and another, the Singapore High Court addressed a dispute arising from the failed sale of a property. The plaintiffs, New Dennis Arthur and Karen Maria New, sued the defendants, Greesh Ghai Monty and Espadas Arevalo Amparo Maria, for specific performance and damages after the defendants refused to complete the purchase, alleging misrepresentation regarding water leakage. The defendants counterclaimed for rescission of the contract. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, denying the counterclaim for rescission but also denying specific performance, awarding nominal general damages of $1,000 and specific damages of $7,650.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiffs; Specific performance denied; Damages awarded.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court case involving a property sale dispute where the defendants refused to complete the purchase due to alleged misrepresentation about water leakage.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
New Dennis ArthurPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffPartial
Karen Maria NewPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffPartial
Greesh Ghai MontyDefendantIndividualCounterclaim DismissedLost
Espadas Arevalo Amparo MariaDefendantIndividualCounterclaim DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lim Tong ChuanTan Peng Chin LLC
Cai Jianyi EdwinTan Peng Chin LLC
Seah Zhen Wei PaulTan Kok Quan Partnership
Loh Khian ChungTan Kok Quan Partnership

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiffs were selling their Singapore holiday home.
  2. Defendants were looking to purchase a home and were wary of water leakage issues.
  3. Defendants inspected the property multiple times before making an offer.
  4. An Option to Purchase was issued and exercised.
  5. Defendants discovered water leakage before completion.
  6. Defendants refused to complete the purchase due to the water leakage.
  7. Plaintiffs sued for specific performance and damages.

5. Formal Citations

  1. New Dennis Arthur and another v Greesh Ghai Monty and another, Suit No 408 of 2011, [2012] SGHC 122

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Defendants made an offer to purchase the Emery Point Property.
Plaintiffs issued the defendants an Option to Purchase.
Defendants exercised the Option to Purchase.
Second defendant discovered water leakage in the property.
Second defendant met with the building manager, McCoy Young.
Proposed completion date.
Plaintiffs moved furniture back to the property.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Misrepresentation
    • Outcome: The court found that even if there was misrepresentation, it did not induce the defendants to enter into the contract.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • False statement of fact
      • Inducement to contract
  2. Specific Performance
    • Outcome: The court denied specific performance, finding that damages were an adequate remedy.
    • Category: Remedial

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Specific Performance
  2. Monetary Damages
  3. Rescission of Contract

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Misrepresentation

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Property Law

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Huang Ching Hwee v Heng Kay Pah and anotherCourt of AppealYes[1992] 3 SLR(R) 452SingaporeCited regarding the obligation of the seller to disclose latent defects of title, as opposed to defects of quality, in the property.
Anders Utkilens Rederi A/S v O/Y Lovisa Stevedoring Co A/B and Keller Bryant Transport Co LtdN/AYes[1985] 2 All ER 669N/ACited regarding the court's discretion to order specific performance where damages are an adequate remedy.
Hope v WalterN/AYes[1900] 1 Ch 257N/ACited regarding the court's power to refuse specific performance in certain circumstances.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Option to Purchase
  • Water Leakage
  • Misrepresentation
  • Specific Performance
  • Rescission
  • Latent Defect

15.2 Keywords

  • property sale
  • misrepresentation
  • water leakage
  • specific performance
  • rescission
  • contract law
  • real estate

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Misrepresentation80
Contract Law75
Real Estate65
Rescission60
Damages50
Sale of Property40
Mistake30

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Property Law
  • Real Estate Transactions