Wellspring Investments v Sam Samuel: Encroachment Dispute over Dairy Farm Road Shop Units

In Wellspring Investments Ltd v Sam Samuel and Chow Siow May, the High Court of Singapore ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, Wellspring Investments Ltd, in a dispute concerning the encroachment of the Defendants' shop unit, B1-09, onto the Plaintiff's adjacent unit, B1-08, at Dairy Farm Road. The Plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction for the Defendants to rectify the boundary wall. The court, presided over by Woo Bih Li J, granted the Plaintiff's requested reliefs, including damages to be assessed and costs, affirming its decision after further arguments from the Defendants.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

High Court case regarding encroachment of shop unit B1-09 onto B1-08 at Dairy Farm Road. Court ruled in favor of Wellspring Investments, ordering Sam Samuel to rectify the boundary.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Wellspring Investments LtdPlaintiffCorporationJudgment for PlaintiffWonJoseph Lee, Kelvin Ong
Sam SamuelDefendantIndividualClaim DismissedLostGodwin G Campos
Chow Siow MayDefendantIndividualClaim DismissedLostGodwin G Campos

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Woo Bih LiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Joseph LeeRodyk & Davidson LLP
Kelvin OngRodyk & Davidson LLP
Godwin G CamposGodwin Campos LLC

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff owns shop unit B1-08; Defendants own adjacent unit B1-09.
  2. Plaintiff claimed B1-09 encroached on B1-08.
  3. Online search indicated both units were 41sqm.
  4. Survey showed B1-09 was about 61sqm, B1-08 about 21sqm.
  5. Defendants initially denied encroachment, later suggested boundary wall was correct.
  6. Defendants argued the survey plan had not been updated.
  7. Defendants bought B1-09 from Maybank in 2001; Plaintiff bought B1-08 from Maybank later.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Wellspring Investments Ltd v Sam Samuel and another, Originating Summons No 396 of 2013, [2014] SGHC 43

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Plaintiff engaged Mr Tang to conduct a survey of B1-08 and adjacent units.
First hearing of the Plaintiff’s application.
First affidavit of the first Defendant filed.
Court granted the Plaintiff the reliefs it had sought with damages to be assessed by a judge and costs.
Godwin Campos LLC wrote to request an opportunity to present further arguments.
Campos wrote to forward one letter dated 23 September 2002 from Rajah & Tann LLP to the Defendants and one letter dated 12 November 2003 from BH&L to the Defendants.
Further arguments took place.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Encroachment
    • Outcome: The court found that the Defendants' unit was encroaching on the Plaintiff's unit.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Relevance of Purchase Terms
    • Outcome: The court held that the terms of the Plaintiff's and Defendants' purchases were irrelevant to the encroachment claim.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Mandatory Injunction
  2. Damages
  3. Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Encroachment

10. Practice Areas

  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Land Titles Act (Cap 157, 2004 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Encroachment
  • Boundary Wall
  • Survey Plan
  • Shop Unit
  • Land Titles Act
  • Originating Summons

15.2 Keywords

  • encroachment
  • property dispute
  • Singapore
  • High Court
  • land law
  • injunction

16. Subjects

  • Property Dispute
  • Real Estate Law

17. Areas of Law

  • Property Law
  • Land Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Injunctions