Soon Ah See v Diao Yanmei: Sham Marriage & Revocation of CPF Nomination
In Soon Ah See and Soon Ah Choon v Diao Yanmei, the Singapore High Court addressed whether a sham marriage automatically revokes a prior Central Provident Fund (CPF) nomination. The plaintiffs, sisters of the deceased Soon Chwee Guan, sought to prevent the defendant, Diao Yanmei, from claiming a share of the deceased's CPF monies, arguing their brother's marriage to her was a sham. The court found the marriage to be a sham but ruled it valid under the Women's Charter. However, the court declared that the deceased's CPF nomination in favor of his sisters remained valid, as the legislative intent of the CPF Act was not to benefit parties in sham marriages. The court granted the declaration that the nomination made by the deceased on 5 January 2009 had not been revoked and is therefore valid.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Declaration granted that the nomination made by the deceased on 5 January 2009 had not been revoked and is therefore valid.
1.3 Case Type
Family
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case regarding a sham marriage and its impact on the revocation of a Central Provident Fund (CPF) nomination. The court found the marriage valid but ruled the CPF nomination was not revoked.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soon Ah See | Plaintiff | Individual | Declaration granted | Won | A Rajandran of A Rajandran |
| Soon Ah Choon | Plaintiff | Individual | Declaration granted | Won | A Rajandran of A Rajandran |
| Diao Yanmei | Defendant | Individual | Claim dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Edmund Leow | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| A Rajandran | A Rajandran |
4. Facts
- The deceased nominated his sisters as beneficiaries of his CPF monies in 2009.
- The deceased married the defendant in 2011 without informing his family.
- The deceased continued to live with his mother and sister after the marriage.
- The deceased died in 2013, leaving CPF monies.
- The plaintiffs discovered the marriage after the deceased's death.
- The plaintiffs believed the marriage was a sham to allow the defendant to live and work in Singapore.
- The defendant claimed she met the deceased through a friend and they fell in love.
5. Formal Citations
- Soon Ah See and another v Diao Yanmei, Suit No 69 of 2014, [2016] SGHC 185
- Toh Seok Kheng v Huang Huiqun, , [2011] 1 SLR 737
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Deceased was born. | |
| Deceased married his first wife. | |
| Deceased nominated his daughters as beneficiaries of his CPF monies. | |
| Deceased and his first wife divorced. | |
| Deceased made a will bequeathing his property to his mother and elder sister. | |
| Deceased nominated the plaintiffs to receive his CPF monies. | |
| Marriage between the deceased and the defendant was registered. | |
| Deceased was admitted to hospital. | |
| Deceased died. | |
| First plaintiff discovered the deceased’s nomination had been automatically revoked. | |
| First plaintiff wrote to the CPF Board to stop the collection of the CPF money. | |
| Interim injunction granted by Choo Han Teck J to restrain the Board from releasing any monies in the deceased’s CPF account. | |
| Plaintiffs started Suit No 69 of 2014. | |
| Assistant registrar found that Toh Seok Kheng remained good law and that the plaintiffs’ lawsuit disclosed no reasonable cause of action. | |
| Appeal heard and allowed. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Validity of a sham marriage under the Women's Charter
- Outcome: The court held that a sham marriage is not void under the Women's Charter.
- Category: Substantive
- Revocation of CPF nomination upon marriage
- Outcome: The court held that the marriage, while formally valid, is not the sort of marriage that falls within the meaning of “marriage” in s 25(5)(a) of the CPF Act and therefore did not revoke the CPF member’s nomination.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the marriage between the defendant and the deceased is null and void
- Orders preventing the defendant from obtaining a share of the CPF monies
9. Cause of Actions
- Declaration that the marriage is null and void
10. Practice Areas
- Family Law
- Wills and Estates
- CPF Nomination
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Toh Seok Kheng v Huang Huiqun | High Court | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 737 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that Singapore law does not recognize 'sham marriage' as a ground to invalidate a marriage. |
| Tan Ah Thee and another (administrators of the estate of Tan Kiam Poh (alias Tan Gna Chua), deceased) v Lim Soo Foong | High Court | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 957 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the grounds for holding a marriage to be void are set out exhaustively in section 105 of the Women's Charter. |
| Lim Ying v Hiok Kian Ming Eric | Unknown | Yes | [1991] 2 SLR(R) 525 | Singapore | Cited to argue that section 105 of the Women's Charter was not exhaustive, but distinguished by the court. |
| Vervaeke (formerly Messina) v Smith | House of Lords | Yes | [1983] AC 145 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that in English law, there is no room for mental reservations or private arrangements regarding the parties’ personal relationships once it is established that the parties are free to marry one another, have consented to the achievement of the married state and observed the necessary formalities. |
| Kwong Sin Hwa v Lau Lee Yen | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR(R) 90 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that if a man and a woman exchange consents to marry with due formality before a person lawfully authorised to solemnise a marriage under the Charter, intending to acquire the status of married persons, it is immaterial that they intend the marriage to take effect in some limited way. |
| Ng Bee Hoon v Tan Heok Boon | Unknown | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR(R) 335 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that if a man and a woman exchange consents to marry with due formality before a person lawfully authorised to solemnise a marriage under the Charter, intending to acquire the status of married persons, it is immaterial that they intend the marriage to take effect in some limited way. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Women's Charter (Cap 353, Rev Ed 2009) | Singapore |
| Central Provident Fund Act (Cap 36, Rev Ed 2013) | Singapore |
| Intestate Succession Act (Cap 146, Rev Ed 2013) | Singapore |
| Immigration Act (Cap 133, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Wills Act (Cap 352, 1996 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Sham marriage
- Marriage of convenience
- CPF nomination
- Revocation
- Women's Charter
- Intestate Succession Act
- Central Provident Fund Act
- Lawful impediment
15.2 Keywords
- Sham marriage
- CPF
- Nomination
- Revocation
- Family Law
- Singapore
- Women's Charter
- Intestate Succession Act
- Central Provident Fund Act
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Family Law | 75 |
| Void marriage | 70 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 60 |
| Succession Law | 60 |
| Wills | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Family Law
- Contract Law
- Statutory Interpretation
- Succession Law