Foo Jee Boo v Foo Jhee Tuang: Estate Distribution Dispute over Late Father & Mother's Estates
In Foo Jee Boo and another v Foo Jhee Tuang and another (Foo Jee Seng, intervener), the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute concerning the distribution of the estates of Foo Tai Joong (Late Father) and Yap Wee Kien (Late Mother). The plaintiffs, Foo Jee Boo and another, sought to amend their statement of claim against the first defendant, Foo Jhee Tuang, and the second defendant, TJH Law Corporation, regarding the handling of both estates. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' leave to appeal applications, upholding the exclusion of certain paragraphs from the pleadings related to claims against the second defendant concerning the Late Mother's estate.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs' leave to appeal applications dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
High Court case involving a family dispute over the distribution of the estates of Foo Tai Joong and Yap Wee Kien. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' application.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foo Jee Boo | Plaintiff | Individual | Leave to appeal applications dismissed | Lost | |
| Foo Jhee Tuang | Defendant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
| TJH Law Corporation | Defendant | Corporation | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
| Foo Jee Seng | Intervener | Individual | Neutral | Neutral |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| George Wei | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The litigation involves a family dispute over the distribution of the estates of Foo Tai Joong (Late Father) and Yap Wee Kien (Late Mother).
- The Late Father passed away in May 1979, and the Late Mother passed away on 25 July 2005.
- The 1st Defendant is the sole executor and trustee of the Late Father’s estate and joint executor and trustee of the Late Mother's estate.
- The plaintiffs sought to amend their statement of claim to include claims against the 2nd Defendant related to the Late Mother's estate.
- The plaintiffs are suing the defendants in their personal capacities.
- The 1st Plaintiff is a beneficiary of the Late Mother’s estate, while the 2nd Plaintiff claims to be a creditor.
- The court was asked to determine if the plaintiffs had standing to bring claims against the 2nd Defendant in relation to the Late Mother's estate.
5. Formal Citations
- Foo Jee Boo and another v Foo Jhee Tuang and another (Foo Jee Seng, intervener), Suit No 764 of 2013, [2015] SGHC 176
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Foo Tai Joong (Late Father) passed away | |
| Yap Wee Kien (Late Mother) passed away | |
| Foo Jee Fong (Late Brother) passed away | |
| The 1st Defendant took over as the executor and trustee of the Late Father’s estate | |
| Court of Appeal’s decision in CA 70/2011 | |
| Court order made in Civil Appeal No 70 of 2011 | |
| Suit No 764 of 2013 filed | |
| Plaintiffs filed SUM 4655/2014 for leave to amend their statement of claim | |
| Hearing before George Wei J | |
| Plaintiffs wrote a letter to the court requesting for further arguments | |
| Plaintiffs filed SUM 786/2015 and SUM 787/2015, seeking leave to appeal | |
| Hearing adjourned at the request of the 1st Defendant’s counsel | |
| Oral submissions heard | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Standing to Sue
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiffs, in their personal capacities, did not have standing to bring claims related to the Late Mother's estate because it was not impossible or seriously inconvenient for the joint executor and trustee to bring proceedings.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Beneficiary's right to sue on behalf of an unadministered estate
- Creditor's right to sue on behalf of an unadministered estate
- Related Cases:
- [1996] 3 SLR(R) 27
- Joinder of Causes of Action
- Outcome: The court found it unnecessary to decide on the joinder of causes of action, but commented that it would have been inclined to allow the joinder in the present circumstances.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Propriety of joining claims related to different estates in a single suit
- Potential for embarrassment or delay of trial due to joinder
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary damages
- Account of monies
- Declaration of liability
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of trust
- Breach of fiduciary duty
- Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Estate Litigation
- Trust Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review Publishing Co Ltd and another v Lee Hsien Loong and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 52 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that courts will normally grant parties leave to amend their pleadings if the proposed amendments enable the real questions in controversy between the parties to be decided, unless the amendments would cause the other parties to suffer prejudice that is not compensable by costs. |
| Kings Quality Homes Ltd v AJ Paints Ltd | N/A | No | [1998] 1 WLR 124 | N/A | Cited for the principle that courts have the discretion to look at the merits if it is apparent on the face of the amendments that the claims therein cannot succeed. |
| Wong Moy v Soo Ah Choy | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1996] 3 SLR(R) 27 | Singapore | Cited as the leading local authority in relation to a beneficiary’s standing to sue on behalf of an unadministered estate. |
| Aamna Taseer v Shaan Taseer and others | High Court | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 348 | Singapore | Cited to affirm the proposition that a beneficiary of an unadministered estate did not have any direct, caveatable interest in the assets of the unadministered estate. |
| Joseph Hayim Hayim v Citibank NA | N/A | Yes | [1987] AC 730 | N/A | Cited to support the argument that beneficiaries should have standing to sue when the trustee is the alleged wrongdoer. |
| Lee Han Tiong and others v Tay Yok Swee | High Court | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR(R) 833 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that all executors are necessary and proper parties to an action brought on behalf of the estate and ought to be joined either as plaintiffs or if they do not consent then as defendants. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 6 rule 2(1)(c) and (d) of the Rules of Court |
| Order 15 rule 1(2) of the Rules of Court |
| Order 15 rule 1(a) or (b) of the Rules of Court |
| Order 15 rule 5 of the Rules of Court |
| Order 15 rule 14 of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Standing
- Locus standi
- Joinder of causes of action
- Unadministered estate
- Beneficiary
- Executor
- Trustee
- Personal capacity
- Representative capacity
15.2 Keywords
- estate
- trust
- beneficiary
- executor
- trustee
- standing
- joinder
- civil procedure
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Succession Law | 85 |
| Trust Law | 80 |
| Probate Administration | 75 |
| Civil Practice | 70 |
| Family Assets Distribution | 65 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Evidence Law | 20 |
| Costs | 15 |
16. Subjects
- Trusts and Estates
- Civil Procedure