Tiong Swee Eng v Yeo Khee Siang: Rescission of Settlement Agreement for Misrepresentation
In Tiong Swee Eng v Yeo Khee Siang, the High Court of Singapore addressed the wife's claim against the husband for damages and rescission of a settlement agreement, alleging misrepresentation and non-disclosure regarding the matrimonial pool of assets. The husband counterclaimed for a declaration that the settlement agreement was valid and binding. Judith Prakash J found that the husband had misrepresented the matrimonial pool of assets by omitting a jointly-owned property, but determined that rescission was disproportionate. The court awarded the wife nominal damages of $1,000 in lieu of rescission and declared the settlement agreement valid and binding.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for the wife; damages awarded in lieu of rescission.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Wife's claim for rescission of settlement agreement due to husband's misrepresentation of matrimonial assets fails. Damages awarded in lieu of rescission.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tiong Swee Eng | Plaintiff | Individual | Damages awarded in lieu of rescission | Partial | |
| Yeo Khee Siang | Defendant | Individual | Counterclaim dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiff wife and the defendant husband have been married since 1979.
- The wife claimed damages and rescission of the Settlement Agreement on the grounds of misrepresentation and/or material non-disclosure by the husband.
- The husband made a counterclaim for a declaration that the Settlement Agreement is valid and binding.
- The misrepresentation and non-disclosure related to the husband’s statement of “the matrimonial pool of assets” in his “Mediation Case Summary”.
- The husband was the managing director of Techplas and the majority shareholder.
- Techplas was acquired by Beyonics Technology Limited in August 2000.
- The wife developed misgivings over the Settlement Agreement when she went home that night after signing it.
5. Formal Citations
- Tiong Swee Eng v Yeo Khee Siang, Suit No 871 of 2013, [2015] SGHC 116
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Parties married. | |
| Techplas acquired by Beyonics Technology Limited. | |
| Husband agreed to pay wife $3,714,330 in settlement of her claim. | |
| First lawsuit, Suit No 1009 of 2012, commenced. | |
| Wong Tan & Molly Lim LLC requested mediation of Suit No 1009. | |
| Settlement Agreement made. | |
| Current action commenced. | |
| Husband disclosed additional documents pertaining to his assets. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Misrepresentation
- Outcome: The court found that the husband had misrepresented the matrimonial pool of assets by omitting a jointly-owned property.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- False statement of fact
- Inducement
- Reliance
- Non-disclosure
- Outcome: The court found that there was no obligation on the husband to disclose the substantial gifts he had made to the son and daughter a few years earlier.
- Category: Substantive
- Rescission
- Outcome: The court determined that rescission was a disproportionate response and awarded damages in lieu of rescission.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Rescission of Settlement Agreement
- Declaration that the Settlement Agreement is valid and binding
9. Cause of Actions
- Misrepresentation
- Breach of contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Family Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim Koon Park v Yap Jin Meng Bryan | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 150 | Singapore | Cited for the legal principles relating to an actionable misrepresentation. |
| Surindar Singh s/o Jaswant Singh v Sita Jaswant Kaur | Unknown | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1284 | Singapore | Cited regarding the weight that should be attributed to a settlement agreement in the determination of ancillary matters upon divorce; court found it of little relevance to the present case. |
| Kim Hok Yung v Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA (trading as Rabobank) (Lee Mon Sun, third party) | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 2 SLR(R) 455 | Singapore | Cited to support the argument that there was no need for the wife to have pleaded particulars of the purported bare trust. |
| Teng Ah Kow v Ho Sek Chiu | Unknown | Yes | [1993] 3 SLR(R) 43 | Singapore | Cited regarding the shifting of the evidential burden; court found it did not assist the wife. |
| Au Kin Chong v Ho Kit Joo | High Court | Yes | [2007] SGHC 150 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court's power to divide assets extends to those subsisting at the time of the hearing of ancillary matters. |
| Yow Mee Lan v Chen Kai Buan | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 4 SLR 466 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court divides assets existing at the time of the divorce. |
| BG v BF | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 233 | Singapore | Cited regarding the general duty to make full and frank disclosure of all relevant information. |
| Alwie Handoyo v Tjong Very Sumito and another appeal | Unknown | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the representation must have had real and substantial effect on the representee’s mind. |
| Jurong Town Corp v Wishing Star Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR(R) 283 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a person who has made a false representation cannot escape its consequences just because the innocent party has made his own inquiry or due diligence. |
| Thode Gerd Walter v Mintwell Industry Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2009] SGHC 44 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that whether the wife was induced by the misrepresentation is a question of fact. |
| RBC Properties Pte Ltd v Defu Furniture Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 997 | Singapore | Cited regarding the court's discretion to award damages in lieu of rescission under s 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misrepresentation Act (Cap 390, 1994 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Settlement Agreement
- Matrimonial pool of assets
- Misrepresentation
- Non-disclosure
- Techplas proceeds
- Anak Bukit Property
- Beyonics shares
15.2 Keywords
- settlement agreement
- misrepresentation
- matrimonial assets
- rescission
- family law
- contract law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Matrimonial Assets | 95 |
| Division of Matrimonial Property | 90 |
| Family Law | 90 |
| Misrepresentation | 85 |
| Settlement Agreement | 75 |
| Contract Law | 70 |
| Non-disclosure | 65 |
| Breach of Contract | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Contract Law
- Family Law
- Settlement Agreements
- Misrepresentation