UJT v UJR: Resulting & Constructive Trusts, Probate, & Right of Abode Dispute

In UJT v UJR, the Singapore High Court addressed a dispute over a two-story terraced house. The Grandson, as executor, sought to sell the property, while the Grandmother claimed a beneficial interest or a right to remain. The court dismissed the Grandmother's suit, finding insufficient evidence for a resulting or constructive trust, and no right of abode. The court made orders to facilitate the sale of the property.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Suit dismissed; orders made pursuant to the Probate Application to facilitate the sale of the property.

1.3 Case Type

Probate

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court judgment regarding a property dispute involving resulting trusts, constructive trusts, and a right of abode claim.

1.7 Decision Date

26 February 2018

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
UJT	Plaintiff, Defendant	Individual	Suit Dismissed	Lost	Samuel Wee of Yusarn Audrey Darrell Low of Yusarn Audrey Tan Siah Yong of ComLaw LLC
UJR	Defendant, Plaintiff	Individual	Orders Granted	Won	Samuel Wee of Yusarn Audrey Darrell Low of Yusarn Audrey Tan Siah Yong of ComLaw LLC
UJS	Defendant	Individual	Neutral	Neutral	Johnny Seah of Seah & Co
UJU	Defendant	Individual	Neutral	Neutral	Johnny Seah of Seah & Co

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Valerie Thean	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Samuel Wee	Yusarn Audrey
Darrell Low	Yusarn Audrey
Tan Siah Yong	ComLaw LLC
Johnny Seah	Seah & Co

4. Facts

The Grandfather died on 5 June 2014, leaving a will.
The will gave the Property to the Fourth Son and the Grandson upon trust to sell and share the proceeds equally.
The Property was the matrimonial home of the Grandfather and Grandmother.
The Property is occupied by the Grandmother, the Fourth Son, and the Second Son.
The Grandmother claimed she contributed to the purchase price of the Property.
The Grandson applied for orders to effect the sale of the Property.
The Grandmother filed a Suit seeking a declaration that she has a beneficial interest in the Property or a right to remain in it.

5. Formal Citations

UJT v UJR, Suit No 274 of 2017, [2018] SGHC 44
UJR v UJS, Originating Summons (Probate) No 9 of 2016, [2018] SGHCF 6

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1949-01-01	Grandfather and Grandmother married.
1967-01-01	Grandfather and Grandmother bought the Property.
1988-01-01	Grandfather took out a loan secured on the Property.
2002-10-29	Grandfather drafted a will.
2014-06-05	Grandfather died.
2014-10-01	Grandson applied for grant of probate.
2014-11-01	Grant of probate issued to Grandson.
2015-03-01	Grandmother and Second Son were sued by the Eldest Son.
2015-04-01	Grandson issued a citation to the Fourth Son.
2015-08-01	Court ordered that the Fourth Son would be deemed to have renounced his rights.
2015-09-01	Court ordered that the Fourth Son’s rights as an executor under the will had ceased.
2016-02-01	Parties in the suit reached a settlement after mediation.
2016-05-01	Grandson applied for orders to effect the sale of the Property.
2017-03-01	Grandmother filed the Suit against the Grandson.
2017-11-21	Trial of the Suit took place.
2017-11-22	Trial of the Suit took place.
2017-12-01	Trial of the Suit took place.
2018-02-27	Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

Resulting Trust
- Outcome: The court found that the Grandmother failed to prove she contributed to the purchase price, therefore no resulting trust existed.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2014] 3 SLR 1048
  - [2008] 2 SLR(R) 108
Common Intention Constructive Trust
- Outcome: The court found that the Grandmother's case was not pleaded with sufficient particularity and the evidence was insufficient to establish a common intention.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2016] 3 SLR 1222
  - [2007] 2 AC 432
Proprietary Estoppel
- Outcome: The court rejected the Grandmother's claim based on proprietary estoppel because it was not pleaded.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2015] 5 SLR 1422
  - [2007] 1 SLR(R) 292
Right of Abode
- Outcome: The court held that the Grandmother's right to abode could not be supported on the ground that she has a licence coupled with an equity.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [1965] AC 1175
  - [1972] Ch 359
  - [1989] Ch 1
  - [2015] 4 SLR 283
Laches
- Outcome: The court held that the Grandmother was not barred by the doctrine of laches from bringing her claims in equity.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [2016] 2 SLR 464
Executor's Authority to Sell Property
- Outcome: The court held that the Grandson has independent authority to sell the Property and gave orders to facilitate his doing so.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [1992] 2 SLR(R) 395
  - [1989] 1 SLR(R) 189
  - [1921] 2 Ch 59
  - [1992] 3 SLR(R) 516
  - [1997] 1 SLR(R) 970
  - [1936] 1 MLJ 213
Commission for Executor
- Outcome: The court held that the Grandson's claim for commission is premature.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2009] 4 SLR(R) 11

8. Remedies Sought

Declaration of Beneficial Interest
Right to Abode
Postponement of Sale
Commission

9. Cause of Actions

Resulting Trust
Constructive Trust
Proprietary Estoppel
Breach of Trust

10. Practice Areas

Estate Planning
Trust Litigation
Probate Litigation
Property Law

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Chng Weng Wah v Goh Bak Heng	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[2016] 2 SLR 464	Singapore	Cited for the factors considered regarding the doctrine of laches.
Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 1048	Singapore	Cited for the principles on when a resulting trust arises and the requirements for establishing a common intention constructive trust.
Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and another	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2008] 2 SLR(R) 108	Singapore	Cited for the principles on when a resulting trust arises.
Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Ethel Anne and another	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2016] 3 SLR 1222	Singapore	Cited for the principles on when a common intention constructive trust arises.
Stack v Dowden	House of Lords	Yes	[2007] 2 AC 432	England	Cited for the explanation of 'compelling evidence' in the context of common intention constructive trusts.
Philipps v Philipps	Queen's Bench Division	Yes	(1878) 4 QBD 127	England	Cited for the principle that a pleading should state facts that put the opposing party on their guard.
Bruce v Odhams Press Ltd	England Court of Appeal	Yes	[1936] 1 KB 697	England	Cited for the definition of 'material facts' in pleadings.
Multi-Pak Singapore Pte Ltd (in receivership) v Intraco Ltd and others	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1992] 2 SLR(R) 382	Singapore	Cited for the definition of 'material facts' in pleadings.
Millington v Loring	Queen's Bench Division	Yes	(1881) 6 QBD 190	England	Cited for the principle that facts in issue at trial are material facts that must be pleaded.
V Nithia (co-administratrix of the estate of Ponnusamy Sivapakiam, deceased) v Buthmanaban s/o Vaithilingam and another	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[2015] 5 SLR 1422	Singapore	Cited for the principle that material facts supporting each element of a cause of action must be pleaded, especially in a claim based on proprietary estoppel.
Hong Leong Singapore Finance Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2007] 1 SLR(R) 292	Singapore	Cited for the elements of proprietary estoppel.
National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth	House of Lords	Yes	[1965] AC 1175	England	Cited for the principle that a spouse's right to occupy the matrimonial home is a 'mere equity' and not an equitable interest, enforceable only against the other spouse.
Binions and another v Evans	England Court of Appeal	Yes	[1972] Ch 359	England	Cited for the concept of a licence coupled with an equity giving rise to a right of occupation enforceable against third parties.
DHN Food Distributors Ltd and others v London Borough of Tower Hamlets	England Court of Appeal	Yes	[1976] 3 All ER 462	England	Cited for the view that a constructive trust would be imposed whenever a purchaser takes property subject to a contractual licence.
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold and another	England Court of Appeal	Yes	[1989] Ch 1	England	Cited for the principle that a contractual licence does not create an interest in land and that a constructive trust may be imposed only where the transferee's conscience is affected.
Guy Neale and others v Ku De Ta SG Pte Ltd	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[2015] 4 SLR 283	Singapore	Cited for endorsing the position set out in Ashburn Anstalt regarding contractual licenses and constructive trusts.
Richards v Richards	House of Lords	Yes	[1984] AC 174	England	Cited for the concept of a judicially protected right of occupation.
Herman Iskandar v Shaikh Esa and another	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1992] 2 SLR(R) 395	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a sole executor has the power to sell property under a statutory trust for sale.
Wong Boon Pin v Wong Boon Wah	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1989] 1 SLR(R) 189	Singapore	Cited for characterizing the statutory trust under the Residential Property Act as a trust for sale.
Mucklow v Fuller	Court of Chancery	Yes	(1821) Jac 198	England	Cited for the principle that proving a will constitutes acceptance of the trusts constituted by the will.
Booth v Booth	Rolls Court	Yes	(1838) 1 Beav 125	England	Cited for the principle that proving a will constitutes acceptance of the trusts constituted by the will.
Stiles v Guy	Court of Exchequer	Yes	(1832) 4 Y & C Ex 572	England	Cited for the principle that proving a will constitutes acceptance of the trusts constituted by the will.
In re Ponder	Chancery Division	Yes	[1921] 2 Ch 59	England	Cited for the principle that an executor's power to dispose of property ceases when he completes the administration of the deceased's estate.
Lee Yoke San and another v Tsong Sai Sai Cecilia and another	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1992] 3 SLR(R) 516	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an executor's power to dispose of property ceases when he completes the administration of the deceased's estate.
Scan Electronics (S) Pte Ltd v Syed Ali Redha Alsagoff and others	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[1997] 1 SLR(R) 970	Singapore	Cited for the exception to the general rule that an executor's power to dispose of property survives the completion of administration in so far as it is needed to facilitate the distribution of assets.
Re A Contract between Wee Poh Neo and Goona Veeragoo Naidoo	Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements	Yes	[1936] 1 MLJ 213	Singapore	Cited for the observation that a dishonest person who is both executor and trustee under the will, by falsely alleging to an innocent purchaser that he is selling qua executor, may therefore be enabled, at any rate during a period of six years after the testator’s death, to sell all the trust property and to pocket the proceeds unimpeded by any necessity of abetment by a second trustee.
Bedson v Bedson	England Court of Appeal	Yes	[1965] 2 QB 666	England	Cited for the principle that the court must have regard to the purpose of the trust and discern whether it was indeed to sell the land or to retain it for some other purpose.
Shiraz Abidally Husain and another v Husain Safdar Abidally and others	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2009] 4 SLR(R) 11	Singapore	Cited for the factors the court should consider in deciding the quantum of commission to be awarded to an executor.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rule 244 of the FJR
Rule 540 of the FJR
Rule 672(2) of the FJR

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Family Justice Act (No 27 of 2014)	Singapore
Family Justice Rules 2014 (S 813/2014)	Singapore
Trustees Act (Cap 337, 2005 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Ed)	Singapore
Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Probate and Administration Act (Cap 251, 2000 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Resulting Trust
Constructive Trust
Common Intention
Proprietary Estoppel
Right of Abode
Executor
Trustee
Probate
Laches
Matrimonial Home
Trust for Sale

15.2 Keywords

Trust
Probate
Property
Family
Singapore
High Court
Beneficial Interest
Executor
Resulting Trust
Constructive Trust
Proprietary Estoppel
Right of Abode

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Trust Law	80
Wills and Probate	75
Common Intention Constructive Trust	70
Estate Administration	60
Trusts — Express trusts	60
Trusts — Constructive trusts	60
Property Law	50
Succession Law	40
Civil Procedure	30

16. Subjects

Trusts
Probate
Property Law
Family Law