Sia Chin Sun v Yong Wai Poh: Undue Influence, Estate Assets, and Interim Injunction

In Sia Chin Sun v Yong Wai Poh, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by Ms. Sia, daughter of the deceased Mr. Sia Chin Sun, to intervene in a lawsuit initiated by her father against Mr. Yong Wai Poh, alleging undue influence and seeking recovery of funds and property transferred to Mr. Yong. Following Mr. Sia's death, Ms. Sia sought to be added as a plaintiff and obtain an interim injunction to prevent Mr. Yong from dissipating assets. The court granted Ms. Sia's application to intervene for limited purposes and issued an interim injunction, finding special circumstances warranted the intervention to protect the estate's assets pending resolution of probate proceedings.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Applications granted, stay order lifted for limited purposes, and interim injunction granted.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court allowed Ms. Sia's intervention to protect her father's estate assets, granting an interim injunction against Mr. Yong for potential asset dissipation.

1.7 Decision Date

17 June 2018

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Sia Chin Sun	Plaintiff	Individual	Deceased	Neutral
Yong Wai Poh	Defendant	Individual	Interim Injunction Granted	Lost	Christopher Anand s/o Daniel of Advocatus Law LLP Ang Si Yi of Advocatus Law LLP
Sia Tze Ming	Non-party	Individual	Intervention Allowed	Won	Tang Jin Sheng of LVM Law Chambers LLC Lee Sien Liang Joseph of LVM Law Chambers LLC Lok Vi Ming SC of LVM Law Chambers LLC Tan Jia Hui of LVM Law Chambers LLC Ng Hian Pheng Evans of LVM Law Chambers LLC

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Hoo Sheau Peng	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Christopher Anand s/o Daniel	Advocatus Law LLP
Ang Si Yi	Advocatus Law LLP
Tang Jin Sheng	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Lee Sien Liang Joseph	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Lok Vi Ming SC	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Tan Jia Hui	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Ng Hian Pheng Evans	LVM Law Chambers LLC

4. Facts

Mr. Sia transferred $1,192,090.80 to Mr. Yong between 2010 and 2012.
Mr. Sia transferred his share in the Emerald Garden property to Mr. Yong on 12 February 2012.
Mr. Sia stayed with Mr. Yong and his family from 2010 to 2012.
Mr. Sia passed away on 24 March 2016, leaving behind multiple wills.
Mr. Yong transferred his 13/20 share of the Emerald Garden property to his daughter on 23 March 2017.
Mr. Sia commenced the action against Mr. Yong alleging undue influence.

5. Formal Citations

Sia Chin Sun v Yong Wai Poh, Suit No 780 of 2015, [2018] SGHC 142

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2010-01-01	Mr. Sia started transferring money to Mr. Yong.
2012-02-12	Mr. Sia transferred his share in the Emerald Garden property to Mr. Yong.
2015-07-28	Mr. Sia commenced action against Mr. Yong.
2016-03-24	Mr. Sia passed away.
2016-08-10	Stay of action ordered.
2017-03-23	Mr. Yong transferred his share of the Emerald Garden property to his daughter.
2017-09-22	Ms. Sia applied to lift the stay order and to be added as a second plaintiff.
2017-11-29	Court granted the application to intervene and the interim injunction application.
2018-01-05	Mr. Yong granted leave to appeal.
2018-06-18	Grounds of decision issued.

7. Legal Issues

Undue Influence
- Outcome: Court found a seriously arguable case of undue influence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Relationship of trust and confidence
  - Disadvantageous transactions
Intervention by Beneficiary
- Outcome: Court allowed intervention by beneficiary to protect estate assets.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Special circumstances
  - Protection of estate assets
Interim Injunction
- Outcome: Court granted interim injunction to prevent asset dissipation.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Risk of asset dissipation
  - Balance of convenience

8. Remedies Sought

Declaration of liability
Account of profits
Tracing order
Injunction
Damages

9. Cause of Actions

Undue Influence
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Breach of Trust
Conversion
Monies Had and Received

10. Practice Areas

Commercial Litigation
Estate Planning
Civil Litigation

11. Industries

Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Wong Moy (administratrix of the estate of Theng Chee Khim, deceased) v Soo Ah Choy	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1996] 3 SLR(R) 27	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a beneficiary of an estate may take proceedings to protect the assets of an unadministered estate under special circumstances.
Omar Ali bin Mohd and others v Syed Jafaralsadeg bin Abdulkadir Alhadad and others	High Court	Yes	[1995] 2 SLR(R) 407	Singapore	Cited to explain the basis for proceedings by a beneficiary, which is that they are taken on behalf of the estate to restore lost property for due administration.
Re Atkinson, deceased	N/A	Yes	[1971] VR 612	Australia	Cited to explain that the basis for proceedings by a beneficiary is that they are taken on behalf of the estate and if they are successful, they can only result in the lost property being restored to the estate for use in the due course of administration.
Ching Chew Weng Paul v Ching Pui Sim	High Court	Yes	[2010] 2 SLR 76	Singapore	Cited for the application of the legal principle that a beneficiary may, in special circumstances, institute action to protect and recover assets belonging to the unadministered estate.
Fong Wai Lyn Carolyn v Kao Chai-Chau Linda and others	High Court	Yes	[2017] 4 SLR 1018	Singapore	Cited for the application of the legal principle that a beneficiary may, in special circumstances, institute action to protect and recover assets belonging to the unadministered estate.
Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Vivek Sudarshan Khabya	N/A	Yes	[2017] 4 SLR 1124	Singapore	Cited for the application of the legal principle that a beneficiary may, in special circumstances, institute action to protect and recover assets belonging to the unadministered estate.
Bouvier, Yves Charles Edgar and another v Accent Delight International Ltd and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2015] 5 SLR 558	Singapore	Cited to explain the difference between a proprietary injunction and a Mareva injunction.
American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd	N/A	Yes	[1975] AC 396	United Kingdom	Cited for the applicable test for a proprietary injunction.
Rotary Engineering Ltd and others v Kioumji & Eslim Law Firm and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2017] 1 SLR 907	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a court is empowered to lift a stay it made where the premise of the stay no longer holds.
Wong Moy (administratrix of the estate of Theng Chee Khim, deceased) v Soo Ah Choy	High Court	Yes	[1995] 3 SLR(R) 822	Singapore	Cited for the facts of the case.
First Asia Capital Investments Ltd v Société Générale Bank & Trust and another	High Court	Yes	[2017] SGHC 78	Singapore	Cited for the requirements to establish presumed undue influence.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Order 15 rule 7(2) of the Rules of Court
Order 15 rule 6(b)(ii) 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

Undue influence
Estate assets
Interim injunction
Beneficiary
Probate proceedings
Dissipation of assets
Proprietary claim
Emerald Garden property

15.2 Keywords

undue influence
estate
injunction
beneficiary
Singapore
High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Civil Practice	75
Undue Influence	70
Proprietary Claim	60
Injunctions	60
Probate	50
Beneficiaries Rights	40
Property Law	40
Contract Law	30
Estoppel	30
Corporate Law	20
Trust Law	20
Criminal Law	10

16. Subjects

Civil Procedure
Trusts
Estates
Injunctions