Mohamed Shariff Valibhoy v Arif Valibhoy: Jurisdiction over Muslim Charitable Trusts (Wakaf) & Trustee Removal

In Mohamed Shariff Valibhoy v Arif Valibhoy, the Singapore High Court addressed whether it has jurisdiction under the Trustees Act to remove and appoint trustees of a Muslim charitable trust (wakaf), or whether that power resides solely with the Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (Majlis) under the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). The plaintiffs sought to replace the defendant as a trustee of the Valibhoy Charitable Trust (VCT). The defendant applied to strike out the originating summons, arguing exclusive Majlis jurisdiction. The court agreed with the defendant, holding that the AMLA confers exclusive jurisdiction to manage wakafs, including trustee removal and appointment, to the Majlis. The originating summons was struck out.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Originating Summons struck out; court lacks jurisdiction over wakaf trustee removal.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court judgment regarding jurisdiction over Muslim charitable trusts (wakaf). The court held that the Majlis has exclusive jurisdiction.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant are trustees of the Valibhoy Charitable Trust (VCT), a registered wakaf.
  2. The Plaintiffs sought a court order to replace the Defendant as trustee, alleging he deliberately refused to discharge his duties.
  3. The Defendant applied to strike out the originating summons, arguing the court lacked jurisdiction and the Majlis had exclusive power over wakafs.
  4. The Majlis took the position that the Trustees Act did not confer jurisdiction on the court to remove and appoint trustees of a wakaf.
  5. The Valibhoy Charitable Trust was constituted by cl 4 of the last Will of Haji Vali Mohamed Bin Jooma on 12 April 1948.
  6. The Plaintiffs' application in OS 355 was made under ss 37 and 42 of the Trustees Act and O 92 r4 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed).

5. Formal Citations

  1. Mohamed Shariff Valibhoy and others v Arif Valibhoy, Originating Summons No 355 of 2015 (Summons No 2415 of 2015), [2016] SGHC 11

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Valibhoy Charitable Trust constituted by last Will of Haji Vali Mohamed Bin Jooma.
Originating Summons No 355 of 2015 filed.
Defendant's affidavit filed.
First hearing of Summons No 2415 of 2015.
Majlis provides written response to the court.
Hearing date.
Plaintiffs appealed against decision to strike out OS 355 in Civil Appeal No 204 of 2015.
Plaintiffs' submissions on costs in Summons No 2415 filed.
Adjourned hearing on costs.
Majlis responded to the court.
Judgment Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Jurisdiction over Wakaf
    • Outcome: The court held that it lacked jurisdiction over the wakaf, as the AMLA confers exclusive jurisdiction to the Majlis.
    • Category: Jurisdictional
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Exclusive jurisdiction of Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura
      • Applicability of Trustees Act to wakaf

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Removal of Trustee
  2. Appointment of New Trustee

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Trust

10. Practice Areas

  • Trust Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
LS Investment Pte Ltd v Majlis Ugama Islam SingapuraCourt of AppealYes[1998] 3 SLR(R) 369SingaporeCited as authority that the AMLA changed the legal landscape regarding administration of wakafs, vesting legal title to wakaf properties in the Majlis and limiting the role of trustees.
Syed Abbas bin Mohamed Alsagoff and another v Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura)High CourtYes[2010] 2 SLR 136SingaporeCited as authority that a wakaf differs from an English law trust and that the Trustees Act cannot apply to trustees of a wakaf.
Abdul Rahman bin Mohamed Yunoos and another (trustees of the estate of M Haji Meera Hussain, deceased) v Majlis Ugama Islam SingapuraHigh CourtYes[1995] 2 SLR(R) 394SingaporeCited to support the conclusion that the Trustees Act did not apply to a wakaf.
Wee Soon Kim Anthony v Law Society of SingaporeCourt of AppealYes[2001] 2 SLR(R) 821SingaporeCited for guidance on when the residual inherent jurisdiction and powers of the court should be exercised.
Salijah bte Ab Latef v Mohd Irwan bin Abdullah TeoCourt of AppealYes[1996] 2 SLR(R) 80SingaporeCited in parliamentary debates regarding amendments to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.
Lathibaby Bevi v Abdul MustaphaHigh CourtYes[1996] 3 SLR(R) 698SingaporeCited in parliamentary debates regarding amendments to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Trustees Act (Cap 337, 2005 Rev Ed)Singapore
Administration of Muslim Law Act (Cap 3, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1999 Rev Ed)Singapore
Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Wakaf
  • Trustees Act
  • Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura
  • Administration of Muslim Law Act
  • Trustee
  • Mutawalli
  • Jurisdiction
  • Valibhoy Charitable Trust

15.2 Keywords

  • wakaf
  • muslim law
  • trustees
  • jurisdiction
  • singapore
  • charitable trust

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Muslim Law95
Wakaf Law80
Trust Law75
Administrative Law50

16. Subjects

  • Trusts
  • Muslim Law
  • Jurisdiction