Cheong Soh Chin v Eng Chiet Shoong: Res Judicata & Issue Estoppel in Accounting Phase
In Cheong Soh Chin and others v Eng Chiet Shoong and others, the Singapore High Court addressed a preliminary issue in the accounting phase of a case regarding whether the defendants, Eng Chiet Shoong, Lee Siew Yuen Sylvia, and C S Partners Pte Ltd, could argue the existence of an overarching agreement for the plaintiffs, Cheong Soh Chin, Wee Boo Kuan, and Wee Boo Tee, to cover the third defendant's expenses. The court determined that the defendants were barred by the doctrine of res judicata, specifically cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel, from re-litigating this issue, as it had been previously decided against them in the liability phase. The court also held that the defendants are precluded from raising any arguments on the basis of contract or quantum meruit to resist any of the plaintiff’s claims to falsify the account.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of Singapore1.2 Outcome
The court held that both cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel operate to prevent the defendants from arguing that there was an overarching agreement for the plaintiffs to pay the costs and expenses incurred by the defendants for the plaintiffs’ investments. The court also held that the defendants are precluded from raising any arguments on the basis of contract or quantum meruit to resist any of the plaintiff’s claims to falsify the account.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court judgment on res judicata and issue estoppel, preventing defendants from re-litigating an overarching agreement in the accounting phase.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheong Soh Chin | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment in favor of Plaintiff | Won | |
| Wee Boo Kuan | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment in favor of Plaintiff | Won | |
| Wee Boo Tee | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment in favor of Plaintiff | Won | |
| Eng Chiet Shoong | Defendant | Individual | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | |
| Lee Siew Yuen Sylvia | Defendant | Individual | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | |
| C S Partners Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment against Defendant | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Vinodh Coomaraswamy | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiffs are the Wees, a family of high net worth individuals.
- The defendants, Eng Chiet Shoong and Sylvia Lee, are experienced asset managers.
- The parties agreed to combine capital and financial expertise in the WWW Concept.
- The Wees invested US$30m in Initial PE Funds and US$100m in Additional PE Funds.
- The Wees’ investments were held through a network of 24 special purpose vehicles controlled by the Engs.
- The relationship between the parties deteriorated, and the Wees brought an action against the Engs.
- The Engs brought a counterclaim against the Wees for fees and expenses incurred in managing the Wees’ investments.
5. Formal Citations
- Cheong Soh Chin and others v Eng Chiet Shoong and others, Suit No 322 of 2012 (Summons No 2927 of 2017), [2018] SGHC 130
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Parties agreed to combine capital and financial expertise in the WWW Concept. | |
| Wees invested US$30m in five PE funds (Initial PE Funds). | |
| Wees invested US$100m in ten additional funds (Additional PE Funds). | |
| Wees brought action against the Engs. | |
| High Court decision in Cheong Soh Chin (HC). | |
| Court of Appeal decision in Eng Chiet Shoong (CA). | |
| Hearing on preliminary issue. | |
| Hearing on preliminary issue. | |
| Pre-trial conference. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Res Judicata
- Outcome: The court held that the defendants are precluded by the doctrine of res judicata from raising the issue of an overarching agreement.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Cause of action estoppel
- Issue estoppel
- Extended doctrine of res judicata
- Issue Estoppel
- Outcome: The court held that issue estoppel operates to prevent the defendants from arguing that there was an overarching agreement.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Identity of subject matter
- Fundamental determination
- Issue raised and argued
8. Remedies Sought
- Account
- Return of assets
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Accounting
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheong Soh Chin and others v Eng Chiet Shoong and others | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 173 | Singapore | Sets out the facts of the parties’ dispute and the High Court’s decision on liability. |
| Eng Chiet Shoong and others v Cheong Soh Chin and others and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 4 SLR 728 | Singapore | Court of Appeal’s decision on liability, which left the High Court’s findings largely undisturbed. |
| The Royal Bank of Scotland NV (formerly known as ABN Amro Bank NV) and others v TT International Ltd (nTan Corporate Advisory Pte Ltd and others, other parties) and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 1104 | Singapore | Outlines the three principles of res judicata: cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, and the extended doctrine of res judicata. |
| Zhang Run Zi v Koh Kim Seng and another | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 175 | Singapore | Explains the elements required to establish cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel. |
| Goh Nellie v Goh Lian Teck and others | Unknown | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 453 | Singapore | Sets out what amounts to “identity of subject matter” for the purposes of issue estoppel. |
| Petroships Investment Pte Ltd v Wealthplus Pte Ltd (in members’ voluntary liquidation) (Koh Brothers Building & Civil Engineering Contractor (Pte) Ltd and another, interveners) and another matter | Unknown | Yes | [2018] 3 SLR 687 | Singapore | Discusses issue estoppel where an appellate court’s reasoning renders a first-instance court’s finding of fact no longer necessary for the appellate court’s ultimate decision. |
| Lim Teck Cheng v Wyno Marine Pte Ltd (in liquidation) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 543 | Singapore | Deals with issue estoppel in the context of an accounting phase of a case. |
| Likpin International Ltd v Swiber Holdings Ltd and another | Unknown | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 962 | Singapore | Deals with the principle against allowing a party to approbate and reprobate. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Res judicata
- Issue estoppel
- Cause of action estoppel
- Overarching agreement
- WWW Concept
- Management fees
- Related expenses
- Accounting phase
- Liability phase
- Quantum meruit
15.2 Keywords
- Res judicata
- Issue estoppel
- Accounting
- Contract
- Singapore
- High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Res Judicata | 95 |
| Contract Law | 60 |
| Business Litigation | 50 |
| Account of Profits | 40 |
| Commercial Disputes | 40 |
| Accounting | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Res Judicata
- Issue Estoppel