Ng Yok v Ng Geok Lan: Constructive Trust, Fraudulent Misappropriation of Funds

In Ng Yok (sole executor of the Last Will and Testament of Ng Soh) v Ng Geok Lan, the High Court of Singapore heard a claim by the plaintiff, Ng Yok, against the defendant, Ng Geok Lan, for fraudulent conversion and misappropriation of Mr. Ng Soh’s monies. The court allowed the plaintiff’s claim, granting a declaration that the defendant held monies on trust for the plaintiff and ordering an account and an inquiry. The court found that the defendant devised a scheme to appropriate Mr. Ng Soh’s monies to fund the purchase of a property and renovations, and that she held these sums on constructive trust for the plaintiff.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court judgment in Ng Yok v Ng Geok Lan, addressing claims of fraudulent misappropriation of funds and constructive trust. The court found in favor of the plaintiff.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ng YokPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Ng Geok LanDefendantIndividualClaim DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Shriniwas RaiWong Alliance LLP
Ravi ArumugamWong Alliance LLP
Phua Hoon Chong JustinJustin Phua Tan & Partners

4. Facts

  1. Mr. Ng Soh passed away in 2016, after a dispute with his daughter, Ms. Ng Geok Lan.
  2. Mr. Ng commenced an action against Ms. Ng Geok Lan, claiming she had fraudulently converted and misappropriated his monies.
  3. Mr. Ng granted a power of attorney to Ms. Ng Geok Lan.
  4. Ms. Ng Geok Lan obtained an option to purchase the Eastwood Property.
  5. Mr. Ng and Ms. Ng Geok Lan opened a joint account.
  6. Mr. Ng’s funds were used to purchase the Eastwood Property, but the property was registered solely in Ms. Ng Geok Lan’s name.
  7. Mr. Ng filed a police report alleging misappropriation of funds by Ms. Ng Geok Lan.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ng Yok (sole executor of the Last Will and Testament of Ng Soh dated 24 December 2015)vNg Geok Lan, Suit No 873 of 2015, [2018] SGHC 48

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Madam Goh purchased a plot of land in Jalan Raya.
The plaintiff registered a partnership with Mr. Ng and his uncle, Mr. Ng Teng.
The plaintiff, Mr. Ng, and Mr. Ng Teng incorporated a company.
Madam Goh passed away intestate.
Mr. Ng became the registered proprietor of the Jalan Raya Properties.
The Company won a Construction Excellence Award.
The Company began to experience financial difficulties.
The defendant purchased a five-room HDB flat in Punggol.
Mr. Ng granted a power of attorney to the defendant.
The plaintiff commenced Suit 315 against Mr. Ng and Mr. Ng Teng.
Mr. Ng moved out of 34 Jalan Raya and into 36 Jalan Raya to live with the defendant and her husband.
Mr. Ng applied for the court to sanction the sale of 34 Jalan Raya.
An order was made for the sale of both of the Jalan Raya Properties.
An option to purchase for the Jalan Raya Properties was granted to a third party.
The defendant obtained an option to purchase for the Eastwood Property.
The option to purchase for the Jalan Raya Properties was exercised.
The defendant exercised the option to purchase for the Eastwood Property.
Mr. Ng and the defendant opened a joint account at OCBC Bank.
Mr. Ng made the First Will.
The sale of the Jalan Raya Properties was completed.
Mr. Ng received a cheque of $1,939,955.50 for his share of the proceeds of sale of the Jalan Raya Properties.
The cheque was deposited into the Joint Account.
Mr. Ng signed a cheque for the sum of $1,662,500 in favor of the defendant.
The sale of the Eastwood Property was completed.
Mr. Ng moved to the Eastwood Property with the defendant and her family.
The parties in Suit 315 settled their dispute by executing a settlement agreement.
The defendant collected a cheque for $420,000, reflecting the monies that Mr. Ng was entitled to under the Settlement Agreement.
The defendant sold the HDB Flat.
The plaintiff visited Mr. Ng at the Eastwood Property and the parties thereafter reconciled.
Mr. Ng left the Eastwood Property to stay with the plaintiff.
Mr. Ng’s solicitors sent a letter to the defendant with the heading “Misappropriation of Funds”.
Mr. Ng filed a police report.
Mr. Ng commenced this action against the defendant.
Mr. Ng executed the Last Will.
Mr. Ng passed away.
Hearing commenced.
I allowed the plaintiff’s claim with detailed oral grounds, granting a declaration that the defendant held monies on trust for the plaintiff (in his capacity as the executor) and ordering an account and an inquiry.
Judgment Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Constructive Trust
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant held the sums on constructive trust for the plaintiff.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Unconscionable conduct
      • Misappropriation of funds
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 1 SLR 1097
      • [1999] 1 All ER 400
  2. Fraudulent Misappropriation of Funds
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant devised a scheme to appropriate Mr. Ng’s monies.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Declaration of Constructive Trust
  2. Account
  3. Inquiry

9. Cause of Actions

  • Constructive Trust
  • Misappropriation of Funds

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Gimpex Ltd v Unity Holdings Business Ltd and others and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2015] 2 SLR 686SingaporeCited for the principle that breach of the requirement to issue notice under s 32(4)(b) of the Evidence Act read with O 38 r 4 of the Rules of Court can be cured under O 2 of the Rules of Court if the opposing party does not suffer prejudice which would render it unfair for the evidence to be admitted.
Guy Neale and others v Nine Squares Pty LtdCourt of AppealYes[2015] 1 SLR 1097SingaporeCited for the observations regarding constructive trusts.
Paragon Finance plc v DB Thakerar & CoN/AYes[1999] 1 All ER 400N/ACited for the definition of an institutional constructive trust.
Caltong (Australia) Pty Ltd (formerly known as Tong Tien See Holding (Australia) Pty Ltd) and another v Tong Tien See Construction Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2002] 2 SLR(R) 94SingaporeCited for guidance on the orders to be made.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Constructive trust
  • Misappropriation
  • Power of attorney
  • Joint account
  • Eastwood Property
  • Jalan Raya Properties

15.2 Keywords

  • trust
  • fraud
  • property
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Constructive Trust95
Trust Law75
Fraud and Deceit60
Estate Administration50
Wills and Probate40
Fiduciary Duties30
Contract Law20

16. Subjects

  • Trusts
  • Fraud
  • Property Law