Lau Tyng Tyng v Lau Boon Wee: Construction of Will & Enforceability of Conditions
In Lau Tyng Tyng v Lau Boon Wee, the Singapore High Court addressed a dispute between siblings, Lau Tyng Tyng and Lau Boon Wee, over the interpretation of their late father's will. Lau Tyng Tyng sought a determination on the construction of clause 4 of the will, arguing it imposed conditions on the beneficiaries' inheritance of shares in Lau Loon Seng Holdings Pte Ltd. The court, presided over by Edmund Leow JC, dismissed the application, holding that clause 4 was a non-binding expression of the testator's wishes rather than an enforceable condition. The court also found that even if the clause was intended as a condition, it would be void as a restraint upon alienation and for conceptual uncertainty.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed. The court found that clause 4 of the will was merely an expression of the testator's wishes and desires and was not intended to be legally binding or enforceable.
1.3 Case Type
Probate
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case regarding the interpretation of a will clause and whether it imposed enforceable conditions on beneficiaries.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lau Tyng Tyng | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Lau Boon Wee | Respondent | Individual | Application Dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Edmund Leow | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Edmond Pereira | Edmond Pereira Law Corporation |
| Johnson Loo | Drew & Napier LLC |
4. Facts
- The Applicant and the Respondent were named as joint executors and trustees in the Will of their late father.
- The Testator was the sole shareholder and director of Lau Loon Seng Holdings Pte Ltd.
- Lau Loon Seng Holdings Pte Ltd was a holding company and wholly owned four subsidiary companies.
- The Testator's will included a clause expressing his wish that his beneficiaries not sell the shares of Lau Loon Seng Holdings Pte Ltd.
- The Applicant sought a determination on the true construction of clause 4 of the Will.
- The Respondent opposed the Applicant's interpretation of the will.
- The Testator gifted shares in Lau Loon Seng Holdings Pte Ltd to multiple beneficiaries, including the Applicant and Respondent.
5. Formal Citations
- Lau Tyng Tyng v Lau Boon Wee, Originating Summons No 1249 of 2013, [2014] SGHC 114
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| The Testator executed the Will. | |
| The Testator died. | |
| Originating Summons No 1249 of 2013 filed. | |
| Counsel for the parties appeared before the court. | |
| The court dismissed the application. |
7. Legal Issues
- Construction of Will
- Outcome: The court held that clause 4 of the will was merely an expression of the testator's wishes and desires and was not intended to be legally binding or enforceable.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Interpretation of precatory words
- Condition subsequent
- Restraint on alienation
- Conceptual uncertainty
- Related Cases:
- [2012] 4 SLR 339
- [2007] 1 SLR(R) 453
- [2009] 3 SLR(R) 1079
- (1797) 3 Ves 324
- [1998] 3 SLR(R) 833
- [1943] AC 320
- (1883) 23 Ch D 158
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration on the Construction of the Will
9. Cause of Actions
- Determination of Will Construction
10. Practice Areas
- Estate Litigation
- Trust Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lau Loon Seng v Sia Peck Eng | High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR(R) 688 | Singapore | Cited for background facts regarding the Testator's business and divorce. |
| Foo Jee Seng and others v Foo Jhee Tuang and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 339 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing the construction of wills. |
| Goh Nellie v Goh Lian Teck | High Court | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 453 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a testator does not will in vain. |
| Low Ah Cheow and others v Ng Hock Guan | High Court | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 1079 | Singapore | Cited for the admissibility of extrinsic evidence in ascertaining the testator's intention. |
| Bradley v Peixoto | N/A | Yes | (1797) 3 Ves 324 | N/A | Cited as an early case dealing with the rule against restraints on alienation. |
| Toh Eng Lan v Foong Fook Yue and another appeal | N/A | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 833 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of conceptual uncertainty in wills. |
| Clayton v Ramsden | N/A | Yes | [1943] AC 320 | N/A | Cited for the test of conceptual certainty in conditions subsequent. |
| In re Viscount Exmouth; Viscount Exmouth v Praed | N/A | Yes | (1883) 23 Ch D 158 | N/A | Cited for the test of conceptual certainty in conditions subsequent. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Will
- Testator
- Beneficiaries
- Shares
- Condition subsequent
- Restraint on alienation
- Conceptual uncertainty
- Precatory words
- Trust
- Construction of will
15.2 Keywords
- Will
- Construction
- Singapore
- Probate
- Estate
- Trust
- Shares
- Beneficiaries
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Wills and Probate | 90 |
| Succession Law | 70 |
| Will Interpretation | 60 |
| Trust Law | 50 |
| Company Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Wills
- Trusts
- Estate Law
- Probate