Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee: Ratification of Property Disposition under Bankruptcy Act
In Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt, the High Court of Singapore heard an application by Mdm Cheo Sharon Andriesz to ratify the disposition of properties from her husband, the bankrupt, to her. The Official Assignee opposed the application, arguing that the divorce proceedings were a sham to shield assets from creditors. Tan Lee Meng J dismissed Mdm Cheo’s application, finding that the disposition was void under Section 77(1) of the Bankruptcy Act and should not be ratified, as it appeared to be an attempt to put the bankrupt's assets out of reach of his creditors.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Bankruptcy
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed Mdm Cheo's application to ratify the bankrupt's property disposition, finding it an attempt to evade creditors.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheo Sharon Andriesz | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt | Respondent | Government Agency | Application Dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Mdm Cheo commenced divorce proceedings shortly after her husband was served a statutory demand.
- The bankrupt was required to transfer his interest in two properties to Mdm Cheo without consideration.
- The transfer occurred between the bankruptcy application and the bankruptcy order.
- Mdm Cheo knew about the statutory demand and the potential bankruptcy proceedings.
- The bankrupt continued to reside at the matrimonial home after divorce proceedings commenced.
- The bankrupt agreed to pay an unrealistic amount of monthly maintenance.
5. Formal Citations
- Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt, Originating Summons No 133 of 2012, [2012] SGHC 140
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Bangkok Bank issued a statutory demand against the bankrupt for US$8,671,681.56. | |
| Statutory demand served on the bankrupt. | |
| Bankrupt applied to set aside the statutory demand. | |
| Mdm Cheo filed an affidavit supporting the bankrupt's application. | |
| Mdm Cheo commenced divorce proceedings against the bankrupt. | |
| Bankrupt’s application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed. | |
| Bangkok Bank filed a bankruptcy application against the bankrupt. | |
| Bankruptcy application served on the bankrupt. | |
| Bankrupt filed a Notice of Appeal against the dismissal of his application to set aside the bank’s statutory demand. | |
| Bankrupt’s appeal against the decision of the Assistant Registrar in OSB 28/2010 was dismissed. | |
| Mdm Cheo and the bankrupt agreed to a consent judgment. | |
| A bankruptcy order was made against the bankrupt. | |
| The Official Assignee sent a notice to the bankrupt to submit his Statement of Affairs. | |
| The bankrupt filed and affirmed his Statement of Affairs. | |
| Mdm Cheo filed an application to enforce the terms of the interim consent judgment. | |
| Court dismissed Mdm Cheo’s application. |
7. Legal Issues
- Ratification of Property Disposition
- Outcome: The court refused to ratify the disposition of property.
- Category: Substantive
- Good Faith
- Outcome: The court found that Mdm Cheo did not act in good faith.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Ratification of Property Disposition
9. Cause of Actions
- Application for Ratification of Property Disposition
10. Practice Areas
- Insolvency
- Divorce
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Re Flint | N/A | Yes | [1993] 2 WLR 537 | England and Wales | Cited to establish that the transfer of an interest in property by a debtor to his or her spouse pursuant to an order of court is a “disposition of property”. |
| Hill v Haines | N/A | Yes | [2008] 2 WLR 1250 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle of balancing insolvency law and ancillary relief law, protecting creditors against collusive orders while also protecting the bankrupt's spouse and children. Distinguished because it did not concern transactions rendered void by statute. |
| Denney v John Hudson & Co | N/A | Yes | [1992] BCLC 901 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the court must ensure that the interests of unsecured creditors will not be prejudiced when considering whether to make a validating order. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Bankruptcy
- Disposition of Property
- Ratification
- Statutory Demand
- Interim Consent Judgment
- Good Faith
- Matrimonial Assets
15.2 Keywords
- bankruptcy
- property disposition
- ratification
- divorce
- Singapore
- Official Assignee
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Bankruptcy | 90 |
| Disposition of Property | 70 |
| Family Law | 60 |
| Ratification | 50 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Bankruptcy
- Property Law
- Family Law