Ngee Ann Kongsi v Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan: Conversion of Originating Summons & Property Dispute

In the High Court of Singapore, Senior Judge Andrew Ang heard an application by Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan (THK) to convert Originating Summons No 1499 of 2018 into a writ action, which was resisted by The Ngee Ann Kongsi (NAK). NAK seeks possession of the Teochew Building on 97 Tank Road, while THK claims the building is held in trust for its benefit. The court allowed THK's application, finding that substantial disputes of fact are likely to arise, particularly regarding the reasons for the property transfers and the potential claim of proprietary estoppel.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court considered converting an originating summons to a writ action in a property dispute between Ngee Ann Kongsi and Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
The Ngee Ann KongsiPlaintiffCorporationApplication DismissedLostAdrian Wee, Dominic Chan, Noel Oehlers, Nicole Chee, Tan Chee Meng SC, Josephine Choo, Valerie Quay, Eugene Oh
Teochew Poit Ip Huay KuanDefendant, ApplicantAssociationApplication AllowedWonDavinder Singh SC, Jaikanth Shankar, Tan Ruo Yu, Yee Guang Yi, Darren Low

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Andrew AngSenior JudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Davinder Singh SCDavinder Singh Chambers LLC
Jaikanth ShankarDavinder Singh Chambers LLC
Tan Ruo YuDavinder Singh Chambers LLC
Yee Guang YiDavinder Singh Chambers LLC
Darren LowDavinder Singh Chambers LLC
Adrian WeeWongPartnership LLP
Dominic ChanWongPartnership LLP
Noel OehlersWongPartnership LLP
Nicole CheeWongPartnership LLP
Tan Chee Meng SCWongPartnership LLP
Josephine ChooWongPartnership LLP
Valerie QuayWongPartnership LLP
Eugene OhWongPartnership LLP

4. Facts

  1. NAK seeks possession of the Teochew Building at 97 Tank Road.
  2. THK claims the Teochew Building is held upon trust for its benefit.
  3. THK has occupied the Teochew Building since 1963.
  4. NAK requested THK to vacate the building by 30 June 2018.
  5. THK alleges an understanding with NAK regarding its rights to the property.
  6. The land comprising 97 Tank Road consists of the 1953, 1955, and 1959 Properties.
  7. TMS ceased to exist, leading to a cy-pres application by NAK.

5. Formal Citations

  1. The Ngee Ann Kongsi v Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan, Originating Summons No 1499 of 2018 (Summons 955 of 2019), [2019] SGHC 256

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Teochew (Eight Districts) Public Property Preservation Association (TPPPA) founded.
Ngee Ann Kongsi (NAK) established as a body corporate.
Ngee Ann Girls School (now Ngee Ann Primary School) set up.
NAK appointed trustee of immovable properties for Tuan Mong School (TMS).
Legal ownership of the 1955 Properties transferred to NAK.
1959 Property purchased from the Government of Singapore to be held upon trust for TMS.
Teochew Building constructed; THK's office premises located in the building.
TMS moved from 97 Tank Road and renamed Ngee Ann Secondary School.
NAK requested THK to vacate the Teochew Building by 30 June 2018.
THK replied to NAK's request to vacate, requesting comparable space and relocation fee.
NAK lodged a cy-pres application with the Commissioner of Charities.
Commissioner of Charities made the cy-pres order.
THK sent a letter to the Commissioner, seeking an extension of time to make representations regarding the scheme. This was not granted.
NAK commenced OS 1499 for possession of the Teochew Building.
NAK’s Submissions dated.
Hearing date.
Hearing date.
THK’s Submissions dated.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Conversion of Originating Summons to Writ Action
    • Outcome: The court allowed the conversion, finding that a substantial dispute of fact was likely to arise.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Likelihood of substantial dispute of fact
      • Suitability of writ action
    • Related Cases:
      • [2011] 4 SLR 777
  2. Proprietary Estoppel
    • Outcome: The court found that a substantial dispute of fact was likely to arise in relation to a potential claim in proprietary estoppel.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Representation by conduct
      • Reliance
      • Detriment
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 1 SLR(R) 292
  3. Interpretation of Trust Deed
    • Outcome: The court held that extrinsic evidence may be admissible to interpret trust documents, even in the absence of ambiguity.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Settlor's intentions
      • Admissibility of extrinsic evidence
    • Related Cases:
      • [1993] 3 SLR(R) 156
      • [1990] 2 SLR(R) 482
      • [2019] 1 SLR 44
      • [2014] 2 SLR 1165
      • [2008] 3 SLR(R) 1029

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Possession of Property
  2. Declaration of Entitlement to Occupy
  3. Account of Monies

9. Cause of Actions

  • Possession of Property
  • Breach of Trust
  • Proprietary Estoppel

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Real Estate Law

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Woon Brothers Investments Pte Ltd v MCST Plan No 461Court of AppealYes[2011] 4 SLR 777SingaporeCited for the threshold requirement that a substantial dispute of fact is likely to arise before converting an originating summons into a writ action.
Hong Leong Singapore Finance Ltd v United Overseas Bank LtdN/AYes[2007] 1 SLR(R) 292SingaporeCited for the elements of a proprietary estoppel claim: reliance and detriment on the part of the party seeking to raise the estoppel.
Lam Joon Shu and others v Attorney-GeneralN/AYes[1993] 3 SLR(R) 156SingaporeCited for the proposition that a settlor’s intentions are irrelevant in the construction of a trust deed.
Syed Yacob Alkaff v Syed Alwee AlkaffN/AYes[1990] 2 SLR(R) 482SingaporeCited in support of the proposition that extrinsic evidence is not admissible to construe a trust document unless the words in the trust documents are ambiguous.
Lim Sze Eng v Lin Choo MeeN/AYes[2019] 1 SLR 44SingaporeCited for the principle that the court may have recourse to extrinsic evidence, even in the absence of any ambiguity on the face of a document.
Koh Lau Keow v Attorney-GeneralN/AYes[2014] 2 SLR 1165SingaporeCited for the principle that the court may have recourse to extrinsic evidence, even in the absence of any ambiguity on the face of a document.
Zurich Insurance (Singapore) Pte Ltd v B-Gold Interior Design & Construction Pte LtdN/AYes[2008] 3 SLR(R) 1029SingaporeCited for the principle that the court may have recourse to extrinsic evidence, even in the absence of any ambiguity on the face of a document.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Order 28 rule 8 of the Rules of Court
O 24 rr 1 and 2 of the ROC
O 18 r 19 of the ROC
O 14 r 1 of the ROC

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Ngee Ann Kongsi (Incorporation) Ordinance (Cap 370, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Charities Act (Cap 37, 2007 Rev Ed)Singapore
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Originating Summons
  • Writ Action
  • Teochew Building
  • Ngee Ann Kongsi
  • Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan
  • Trust
  • Proprietary Estoppel
  • Settlor's Intentions
  • Cy-pres
  • Tank Road
  • Tuan Mong School

15.2 Keywords

  • Conversion
  • Originating Summons
  • Writ Action
  • Property Dispute
  • Trust
  • Singapore
  • High Court

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Trusts
  • Property Law

17. Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Trust Law
  • Property Law
  • Proprietary Estoppel