Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC v AEL: Professional Negligence in Will Execution
Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC and Mr. Johnny Cheo Chai Beng appealed against the High Court's decision in favor of AEL, AEM, AEN, and others, concerning a professional negligence claim. The plaintiffs alleged that Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC, a firm of solicitors, were negligent in supervising the execution of a new will for the testator, resulting in its invalidity and subsequent distribution of the Singapore Estate according to the Intestate Succession Act, causing financial losses to the intended beneficiaries. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision that the solicitors were liable for the losses suffered by the respondents.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs and the usual consequential orders.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Solicitors Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC sued for negligence in supervising will execution, resulting in unintended intestacy. Appeal dismissed, judgment for client affirmed.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC | Appellant | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Chandra Mohan, Jonathan Cheong, Tan Ruo Yu |
| Johnny Cheo Chai Beng | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Chandra Mohan, Jonathan Cheong, Tan Ruo Yu |
| AEL | Respondent | Individual | Judgment for Respondent | Won | Andrew Ho Yew Cheng |
| AEM | Respondent | Individual | Judgment for Respondent | Won | Andrew Ho Yew Cheng |
| AEN | Respondent | Individual | Judgment for Respondent | Won | Andrew Ho Yew Cheng |
| Grandchildren | Respondent | Individual | Judgment for Respondent | Won | Andrew Ho Yew Cheng |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Quentin Loh | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Chandra Mohan | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
| Jonathan Cheong | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
| Tan Ruo Yu | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
| Andrew Ho Yew Cheng | Engelin Teh Practice LLC |
4. Facts
- The Testator, an Indonesian businessman, made two wills for his Singapore Estate.
- The New Will was invalid as it was executed before only one witness, contrary to the Wills Act.
- The Singapore Estate was distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.
- The Respondents, intended beneficiaries under the New Will, suffered financial losses.
- The Respondents sued the Appellants for negligence, claiming they lost part of their inheritance.
- The Appellants argued they only assisted in drafting the New Will and owed no duty to the beneficiaries.
- The Respondents tried to get the Unintended Beneficiaries to renounce their windfall but failed.
5. Formal Citations
- Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC and another v AEL and others, Civil Appeal No 114 of 2014, [2015] SGCA 29
- AEL and others v Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC and another, , [2014] 3 SLR 1231
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Old Will made | |
| [Y] passed away | |
| New Will drafted | |
| Testator passed away | |
| AEL communicated news of Testator's death to Cheo | |
| AEL filed for grant of probate on the New Will | |
| Cheo informed AEL of rejection of probate application | |
| AEL advised by Cheo to obtain affidavit from Indonesian lawyers | |
| Letters of administration granted by Singapore High Court | |
| High Court decision in AEL and others v Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC and another | |
| Civil Appeal No 114 of 2014 filed | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Professional Negligence
- Outcome: The court found the solicitors liable for negligence in supervising the execution of the will.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to properly supervise will execution
- Breach of duty of care to beneficiaries
- Mitigation of Losses
- Outcome: The court held that the respondents had fulfilled their duty to mitigate their losses.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to distribute estate according to New Will
- Failure to obtain probate on Old Will
- Revocation of Wills
- Outcome: The court found that the Old Will was presumed revoked and the doctrine of conditional revocation did not apply.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Presumption of revocation
- Doctrine of conditional revocation
- Presumption Against Intestacy
- Outcome: The court clarified that the presumption against intestacy operates as a rule of construction in the interpretation of wills where there is ambiguity as to the meaning of the will or the intention of a testator.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages for loss of inheritance
- Reimbursement of legal fees
9. Cause of Actions
- Professional Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Estate Planning Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AEL and others v Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC and another | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1231 | Singapore | The judgment under appeal; the Court of Appeal reviewed the High Court's decision. |
| Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100 | Singapore | Cited for the framework to determine the existence of a duty of care in negligence claims. |
| Anwar Patrick Adrian and another v Ng Chong & Hue LLC and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 761 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that solicitors could owe duties to beneficiaries in appropriate cases. |
| Thorben Langvad Linneberg v Leong Mei Kuen | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 207 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a trial judge is generally better placed to assess the truthfulness and credibility of witnesses. |
| White v Jones | House of Lords | Yes | [1995] 2 AC 207 | England and Wales | Cited as applicable in Singapore insofar as it is consistent with Spandeck. |
| Walker v Geo H Medlicott & Son (a firm) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 All ER 685 | England and Wales | Cited for the proposition that courts have always been alive to the possibility of abuse in cases where families manufacture claims against solicitors. |
| Goh Sin Huat Electrical Pte Ltd v Ho See Jui (trading as Xuanhua Art Gallery) and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 1038 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the appellate process must be to do justice by correcting plainly wrong decisions. |
| Horsfall and Powell v Haywards (a firm) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] PNLR 583 | England and Wales | Cited for the duty to mitigate losses in solicitor negligence cases. |
| Whittingham v Crease & Co | British Columbia Supreme Court | Yes | (1978) 88 DLR (3d) 353 | Canada | Cited in relation to the redistribution of a testator's estate according to the specifications of a defective will. |
| Wilhelm v Hickson | Manitoba Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] 4 WWR 363 | Canada | Cited in relation to the redistribution of a testator's estate according to the specifications of a defective will. |
| Carr-Glynn v Frearsons (a firm) | Chancery Division | Yes | [1999] Ch 326 | England and Wales | Cited in relation to the redistribution of a testator's estate according to the specifications of a defective will. |
| In re Jones, decd | Chancery Division | Yes | [1976] 1 Ch 200 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the testator's intention to revoke was dependent upon his subsequently making a new will. |
| In the Estate of Botting | Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division | Yes | [1951] 2 All ER 997 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the presumption of revocation is capable of being rebutted by the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| Welch v Phillips | Privy Council | Yes | (1836) 1 Moo PC 299 | United Kingdom | Cited for the reason that the law presumes that a document as important as a will would be carefully preserved in a safe place and would not be lost or stolen. |
| Re Lindrea (decd) | Supreme Court of Victoria | Yes | [1953] VLR 168 | Australia | Cited for the applicability of the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| Gordon and another v Beere and others | Supreme Court of New Zealand | Yes | [1962] NZLR 257 | New Zealand | Cited for the applicability of the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| Homerton v Hewett | Court of Probate | Yes | (1872) 25 LT 854 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the doctrine of conditional revocation cannot be relied upon unless there is proof of actual destruction of the Old Will by the Testator. |
| In the Estate of Bridgewater, decd | High Court of Justice | Yes | [1965] 1 WLR 416 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the party seeking to rely on the doctrine of conditional revocation could prove destruction by showing some evidence which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the will had been destroyed. |
| Powell v Powell | Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes | Yes | (1866) LR 1 P&D 209 | England and Wales | Cited for the proposition that in cases of conditional revocation, the revocatory act must be referable, wholly and solely, to the intention of setting up some other testamentary paper. |
| Bolton and Hess v Toronto General Trusts Corporation | Ontario Court of Appeal | Yes | (1961) 29 DLR (2d) 173 | Canada | Cited for the applicability of the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| In the Goods of Gentry | Court of Probate | Yes | (1873) LR 3 P&D 80 | England and Wales | Cited for the extent of proof required in order to establish an absolute intention to revoke the Old Will. |
| In re Harrison | Court of Appeal | Yes | (1885) 30 Ch D 390 | England and Wales | Cited for the rationale that one ought to presume that a testator who has executed a will did not intend to die intestate when he has gone through the form of making a will. |
| Dwyer v Irish | Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division | Yes | (1985) 20 ETR 98 | Canada | Cited for the presumption against intestacy in the context of applying the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| Dwyer v Irish | Newfoundland Court of Appeal | Yes | (1986) 23 ETR 1 | Canada | Cited for the presumption against intestacy in the context of applying the doctrine of conditional revocation. |
| In re Edwards | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1906] 1 Ch 570 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that in cases of ambiguity you may gather an intention that the testator did not intend to die intestate. |
| Re Lee Chew Kuen, deceased | High Court | Yes | [1965–1967] SLR(R) 809 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there was a presumption against intestacy in such cases and the general tenor of the testator’s will suggested that it was never the testator’s intention for intestacy to result. |
| Re Surridge | High Court of Justice | Yes | (1970) 114 SJ 208 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that it is for the Appellants to rebut it and persuade us that the doctrine of conditional revocation should apply. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 38 r 2(1) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 38 r 1 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Wills Act (Cap 352, 1996 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Wills Act (Cap 352, 1996 Rev Ed) s 6(2) | Singapore |
| Intestate Succession Act (Cap 146, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Wills Act s 15 | Singapore |
| Wills Act s 17(1) | Singapore |
| Probate and Administration Act (Cap 251, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Probate and Administration Act (Cap 251, 2000 Rev Ed) s 9 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 32(1)(j)(iii) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 32(3) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Professional negligence
- Will execution
- Intestate Succession Act
- Duty of care
- Mitigation of losses
- Presumption of revocation
- Doctrine of conditional revocation
- Presumption against intestacy
- Beneficiaries
- Testator
- Singapore Estate
- Old Will
- New Will
15.2 Keywords
- Will
- Negligence
- Probate
- Solicitor
- Beneficiary
- Intestacy
- Revocation
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Wills
- Probate
- Negligence
- Civil Litigation
17. Areas of Law
- Professional Negligence
- Wills and Probate
- Civil Procedure
- Trust Law