Tan Thiam Wee v Public Prosecutor: Cheating under s 420 Penal Code & Sentencing Appeal

Tan Thiam Wee appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his sentence of 60 months' imprisonment for 12 charges of cheating under section 420 of the Penal Code. Tan, who managed Idealsoft Pte Ltd, submitted false invoices to OCBC Bank to maintain the company's working capital. The High Court, presided over by Lee Seiu Kin J, allowed the appeal, reducing the total sentence to 30 months, finding that the original sentence was manifestly excessive. The court emphasized that Tan's intention was not direct financial gain but to keep his company afloat.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Tan Thiam Wee appeals against a 60-month sentence for cheating. The High Court reduces the sentence to 30 months, citing a lack of malicious intent.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyAppeal dismissedLost
David Chew of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Serene Chew of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Tan Thiam WeeAppellantIndividualAppeal allowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lee Seiu KinJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
David ChewAttorney-General’s Chambers
Serene ChewAttorney-General’s Chambers
Derek Kang Yu HsienRodyk & Davidson LLP
Philip JeyaretnamRodyk & Davidson LLP

4. Facts

  1. Tan pleaded guilty to 12 charges of cheating under s 420 of the Penal Code.
  2. Tan created false invoices and submitted them to OCBC Bank.
  3. The total amount advanced by OCBC Bank was $2,622,508.12.
  4. OCBC Bank's loss amounted to $634,075.52 after recoveries and set-offs.
  5. Tan's intention was to maintain Idealsoft's working capital, not direct financial gain.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Tan Thiam Wee v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate's Appeal No 282 of 2011, [2012] SGHC 142

6. Timeline

DateEvent
First false invoice submitted
Last false invoice submitted
First police report lodged against Idealsoft
Seventh police report lodged against Idealsoft
Magistrate's Appeal No 282 of 2011
Judgment reserved
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Manifestly Excessive Sentence
    • Outcome: The court found the original sentence of 60 months manifestly excessive and reduced it to 30 months.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2010] 1 SLR 874

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

  • Cheating

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation

11. Industries

  • Banking
  • Finance

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
ADF v Public Prosecutor and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2010] 1 SLR 874SingaporeCited for the approach to be taken in considering sentencing for multiple charges.
Public Prosecutor v Ng Lian WahDistrict CourtNo[2005] SGDC 156SingaporeCited as a precedent for sentencing in cases involving multiple charges of cheating.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Hor Peow VictorDistrict CourtNo[2006] SGDC 148SingaporeCited as a precedent for sentencing in cases involving conspiracy to cheat.
Public Prosecutor v Konduri Prakash MurthyDistrict CourtNo[2007] SGDC 146SingaporeCited for comparison of sentences in similar cases of cheating and misappropriation.
Public Prosecutor v Lau Thuan Heng and anotherDistrict CourtNo[2012] SGDC 1SingaporeCited for comparison of sentences in cases involving cheating a bank using false income documents.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 420Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Cheating
  • False invoices
  • Factoring agreement
  • OCBC Bank
  • Manifestly excessive
  • Sentencing
  • Culpability

15.2 Keywords

  • cheating
  • penal code
  • sentencing
  • appeal
  • false invoices
  • OCBC Bank

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Banking Law