Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee: Bankruptcy Act & Disposition of Property
In Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against the High Court's decision. The case concerned whether the disposition of the appellant's ex-husband's interest in two properties to the appellant, pursuant to an interim consent judgment in a divorce suit, was void under Section 77(1) of the Bankruptcy Act. The court held that the disposition was indeed void and declined to ratify it, dismissing the appeal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal on whether a property disposition under a divorce suit's consent judgment is void under the Bankruptcy Act. Appeal dismissed.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheo Sharon Andriesz | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Lim Seng Siew, Susan Tay, Ong Ying Ping |
| Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Lee Eng Beng, Chua Beng Chye, Raelene Su-Lin Pereira, Cheong Wei Yan Ginny, Matthew Teo |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| V K Rajah | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Lim Seng Siew | Ong Tay & Partners |
| Susan Tay | Ong Tay & Partners |
| Ong Ying Ping | Ong Tay & Partners |
| Lee Eng Beng | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Chua Beng Chye | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Raelene Su-Lin Pereira | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Cheong Wei Yan Ginny | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Matthew Teo | Rajah & Tann LLP |
4. Facts
- The appellant's ex-husband was subject to a bankruptcy application.
- An interim consent judgment (ICJ) in a divorce suit was made between the bankruptcy application and order dates.
- The ICJ included terms for the transfer of the Bankrupt's interest in two properties to the appellant.
- A bankruptcy order was made against the Bankrupt.
- The Official Assignee opposed the ratification of the disposition, contending sham divorce proceedings.
- The court granting the ICJ was not informed that the Bankruptcy Application had been made.
5. Formal Citations
- Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt, Civil Appeal No 49 of 2012, [2013] SGCA 8
- Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt, , [2012] 4 SLR 89
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Bangkok Bank Public Company Limited issued a statutory demand against the Bankrupt. | |
| The statutory demand was served by posting on the front gate of the matrimonial property. | |
| The Bankrupt applied to set aside the statutory demand. | |
| The appellant filed an affidavit in support of the application to set aside the statutory demand. | |
| The appellant commenced divorce proceedings against the Bankrupt. | |
| The application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed. | |
| The Bank filed a bankruptcy application against the Bankrupt. | |
| The Bankruptcy Application was served personally on the Bankrupt at the matrimonial property. | |
| The Bankrupt filed a notice of appeal against the decision to dismiss the application to set aside the statutory demand. | |
| The Bankrupt’s appeal against the decision to dismiss the application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed. | |
| The appellant and the Bankrupt agreed to the ICJ in Divorce Suit No 5600 of 2010. | |
| A bankruptcy order was made against the Bankrupt. | |
| The Bankrupt filed his Statement of Affairs. | |
| The appellant filed an application to enforce the ICJ. | |
| The appellant applied for, inter alia, ratification of the Disposition. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Disposition of Property
- Outcome: The court held that the disposition of property was void under s 77(1) of the Bankruptcy Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1993] Ch 319
- [1983] Ch 45
- Applicability of s 77(1) of the Bankruptcy Act to Court Orders
- Outcome: The court held that s 77(1) applies to a disposition of property pursuant to a court order.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1993] Ch 319
- [2003] EWHC 2784 (Ch)
- Ratification of Disposition
- Outcome: The court declined to ratify the disposition.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Ratification of the Disposition
- Enforcement of the Interim Consent Judgment
9. Cause of Actions
- Application for Ratification of Disposition
- Enforcement of Interim Consent Judgment
10. Practice Areas
- Bankruptcy Litigation
- Divorce
- Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheo Sharon Andriesz v Official Assignee of the estate of Andriesz Paul Matthew, a bankrupt | High Court | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 89 | Singapore | The decision from which this appeal arose. |
| In re Flint (A Bankrupt) | English High Court | Yes | [1993] Ch 319 | United Kingdom | Cited for the proposition that the transfer of an interest in property by a debtor to his or her spouse pursuant to a court order was a “disposition of property” within the meaning of s 77(1). |
| In re Abbott (A Bankrupt), Ex parte Trustee of the Property of the Bankrupt v Abbott (PM) | Divisional Court | Yes | [1983] Ch 45 | United Kingdom | Discussed in relation to s 42 of the Bankruptcy Act 1914 (UK) and s 39 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (UK). |
| Treharne and another v Forrester | English High Court | Yes | [2003] EWHC 2784 (Ch) | United Kingdom | Applied the rule in Flint on very similar facts without considering s 39 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and the fact that it did not apply to s 284 of the Insolvency Act 1986. |
| Mountney v Treharne | N/A | Yes | [2003] Ch 135 | United Kingdom | Example of the equitable doctrine of taking as done that which ought to have been done. |
| Lee Hong Choon v Ng Cheo Hwee | Singapore High Court | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR(R) 92 | Singapore | Reference to observations regarding the promulgation of Practice Directions in both the Family Court as well as the High Court. |
| Northumberland v Att-Gen | N/A | Yes | [1905] A.C. 406 | N/A | Cited for the definition of 'disposition' and 'devolution'. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed) s 77(1) | Singapore |
| Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed) s 77(3)(a) | Singapore |
| Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Cap 61, 1994 Rev Ed) s 73B | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Disposition of property
- Bankruptcy application
- Bankruptcy order
- Interim consent judgment
- Official Assignee
- Ratification
- Matrimonial property
- Relevant Period
15.2 Keywords
- Bankruptcy
- Disposition
- Property
- Divorce
- Court Order
- Singapore
- Bankruptcy Act
16. Subjects
- Bankruptcy
- Property
- Divorce
17. Areas of Law
- Bankruptcy Law
- Family Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property Law