One Investment v Cham Poh Meng: Garnishee Order on Joint Account

In Suit No 832 of 2015, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding a garnishee order on a joint account held by Cham Poh Meng and his wife. One Investment and Consultancy Limited, the judgment creditor, sought to attach the joint account to satisfy a debt. Kannan Ramesh JC allowed the appeal, holding that a joint account cannot be subject to attachment under a garnishee order, reversing the Assistant Registrar's decision.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court held that a joint account cannot be subject to attachment under a garnishee order, reversing the Assistant Registrar's decision.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
DBS Bank LtdGarnisheeCorporationAppeal AllowedWon
One Investment and Consultancy LimitedPlaintiffs, Judgment CreditorsCorporationAppeal DismissedLost
Ng Der Sian (Huang Dexiang)Plaintiffs, Judgment CreditorsIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Cham Poh MengDefendant, Judgment DebtorIndividualAppeal AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Tham Hsu HsienAllen & Gledhill LLP
Hoh Jian YongAllen & Gledhill LLP
Nicholas Seng Soon MengWongPartnership LLP

4. Facts

  1. The Plaintiffs obtained summary judgment against the Defendant for sums due under a written agreement.
  2. The Plaintiffs took out a garnishee order against DBS Bank Ltd to attach the Defendant’s accounts.
  3. One of the accounts was a joint account held in the name of the Defendant and his wife.
  4. The Assistant Registrar held that the joint account could be attached under the garnishee order.
  5. The Garnishee appealed against the Assistant Registrar’s decision.
  6. The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that a joint account cannot be subject to a garnishee order.

5. Formal Citations

  1. One Investment and Consultancy Limited and another v Cham Poh Meng (DBS Bank Ltd, garnishee), Suit No 832 of 2015(Registrar’s Appeal No 130 of 2016), [2016] SGHC 208

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Suit No 832 of 2015 filed
Summary judgment obtained against the Defendant
Garnishee order taken out against DBS Bank Ltd
Hearing date
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Garnishee Order on Joint Account
    • Outcome: The court held that a joint account in the name of the judgment debtor and others cannot be subject to attachment under a garnishee order.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 5 SLR 295
      • [2016] SGHCR 4
      • (1884) 13 QBD 535
      • [1938] 3 All ER 491

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Garnishee Order

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Banking

11. Industries

  • Banking
  • Financial Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Chan Shwe Ching v Leong Lai YeeHigh CourtYes[2015] 5 SLR 295SingaporeConsidered the position of a joint tenant in relation to a writ of seizure and sale.
Chan Yat Chun v Sng Jin Chye and anotherSingapore High Court RegistrarYes[2016] SGHCR 4SingaporeExamined the position of a tenant-in-common in relation to the same issue.
Malayan Banking Bhd v Focal Finance LtdHigh CourtYes[1998] 3 SLR(R) 1008SingaporeAddressed whether a writ of seizure and sale against immovable property could be used to enforce a judgment against a debtor who was a joint tenant of that property.
Macdonald v The Tacquah Gold Mines CompanyEnglish Court of AppealYes(1884) 13 QBD 535EnglandHeld that a debt owing from the defendant company to the judgment debtor and another jointly could not be the subject of a garnishee order.
Hirschhorn v EvansEnglish Court of AppealYes[1938] 3 All ER 491EnglandHeld that a joint account could not be the subject of a garnishee order in respect of the debt of only one of the account holders.
Catlin v Cyprus Finance Corporation (London) LtdQueen's BenchYes[1983] QB 759EnglandEndorsed the position in Macdonald.
D J Colburt & Sons Pty Ltd v Ansen; Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd (Garnishee)Court of Appeal of New South WalesYes[1996] 2 NSWR 289New South WalesFollowed Hirschhorn.
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (NSW) v Westpac Savings Bank LtdFederal Court of AustraliaYes(1987) 72 ALR 634AustraliaFollowed Hirschhorn.
Gail Stevenson and another v The Chartered BankN/AYes[1977] HKLR 566Hong KongFollowed Hirschhorn.
Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd v Blunden (trading as Impact Initiatives)N/AYes[1995] NI 351Northern IrelandFollowed Hirschhorn.
Anumati v Punjab National BankSupreme CourtYesLNIND 2004 SC 1877IndiaFollowed Hirschhorn.
Smith v SchaffnerNova Scotia Supreme CourtYes[2007] NSJ No 294CanadaDeparted from the position in Hirschhorn and allowed the order against 45% of the amount in the joint account.
Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong MunHigh CourtYes[2014] 3 SLR 1048SingaporeFramework for the conduct of the inquiry is likely to be similar to that set out in Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun [2014] 3 SLR 1048 at [160].

13. Applicable Rules

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

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Garnishee Order
  • Joint Account
  • Judgment Debtor
  • Judgment Creditor
  • Attachment
  • Third Party Debt Order

15.2 Keywords

  • Garnishee Order
  • Joint Account
  • Banking Law
  • Singapore
  • Civil Procedure

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Garnishee Proceedings95
Assignment and attachment of money held in bank90
Banking Law75
Civil Procedure60
Judgments and Orders60

16. Subjects

  • Banking
  • Civil Procedure
  • Debt Recovery