Lim Kieuh Huat v Lim Teck Leng: HDB Flat Ownership Dispute Involving Resulting and Constructive Trusts
In Lim Kieuh Huat and Leong Ah Chue v Lim Teck Leng and Zhang Honghong, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute over the beneficial ownership of a Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat. The plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Lim, claimed that their son, Teck Leng, held the flat in trust for them, primarily to evade a resale levy. The court, presided over by Andre Maniam JC, dismissed the plaintiffs' claim, finding that the alleged trust contravened the Housing and Development Act and that the facts did not support a resulting or constructive trust. The court determined that Teck Leng was the beneficial owner of the flat.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Action dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore HDB flat ownership dispute. Parents claim beneficial ownership via resulting/constructive trust, son's name used to evade resale levy. Claim dismissed.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim Kieuh Huat | Plaintiff | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | Abdul Rahman bin Mohd Hanipah, Mohammad Shafiq bin Haja Maideen, Syafiqah binte Ahmad Fu’ad |
| Leong Ah Chue | Plaintiff | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | Abdul Rahman bin Mohd Hanipah, Mohammad Shafiq bin Haja Maideen, Syafiqah binte Ahmad Fu’ad |
| Lim Teck Leng | Defendant | Individual | Judgment against | Lost | Lai Ying Ling Jenny |
| Zhang Honghong | Defendant | Individual | Judgment for | Won | Ang Yu Wen Amelia, Lee Kai Lin Kelyn |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andre Maniam | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Abdul Rahman bin Mohd Hanipah | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
| Mohammad Shafiq bin Haja Maideen | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
| Syafiqah binte Ahmad Fu’ad | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
| Lai Ying Ling Jenny | Jenny Lai & Co |
| Ang Yu Wen Amelia | Lee & Lee |
| Lee Kai Lin Kelyn | Lee & Lee |
4. Facts
- Parents claimed their son held the Kim Tian Flat in trust for them.
- The Kim Tian Flat was registered solely in the son's name.
- The son paid for the flat using proceeds from a previous flat, CPF, and a housing loan.
- The parents alleged the arrangement was to evade a resale levy.
- The son agreed he had no beneficial interest in the flat in these proceedings.
- The son took the opposite position in earlier matrimonial proceedings.
- The Family Justice Courts ordered the son to pay his ex-wife $175,000.
5. Formal Citations
- Lim Kieuh Huat and another v Lim Teck Leng and another, Originating Summons No 1329 of 2019, [2020] SGHC 181
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Parents purchased the Choa Chu Kang Flat | |
| Silat Flat notified for compulsory acquisition | |
| Silat Flat gazetted for compulsory acquisition | |
| Teck Leng obtained HDB approval to purchase the Silat Flat | |
| Teck Leng became the sole owner of the Silat Flat | |
| HDB completion account for CCK Flat issued | |
| Teck Leng and family moved into the Silat Flat | |
| $217,654.72 deposited into joint account of Mr Lim and Teck Leng | |
| $215,036.82 withdrawn from joint account | |
| Teck Leng married Honghong | |
| Effective date of sale for Kim Tian Flat | |
| Government took possession of the Silat Flat | |
| Honghong filed for divorce | |
| Interim judgment granted for divorce | |
| Ancillary Order made, Teck Leng to pay Honghong $175,000 | |
| Sale Order made, Kim Tian Flat to be sold if $175,000 not paid | |
| Deadline for Teck Leng to pay Honghong $175,000 | |
| Parents filed Originating Summons | |
| Hearing date | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Beneficial Ownership
- Outcome: The court held that the parents were not the beneficial owners of the Kim Tian Flat.
- Category: Substantive
- Resulting Trust
- Outcome: The court held that the facts did not support a resulting trust in favor of the parents.
- Category: Substantive
- Constructive Trust
- Outcome: The court held that the facts did not support a common intention constructive trust in favor of the parents.
- Category: Substantive
- Housing and Development Act Compliance
- Outcome: The court held that the alleged trust contravened the Housing and Development Act.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that plaintiffs are the beneficial owners of the Kim Tian Flat
- Determination of the beneficial and legal interests of all parties in the Kim Tian Flat
9. Cause of Actions
- Declaration of Beneficial Ownership
- Determination of Beneficial and Legal Interests
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Property Law
11. Industries
- Real Estate
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cheong Yoke Kuen and others v Cheong Kwok Kiong | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1126 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that trusts over HDB properties created without HDB's prior written approval are void, and to prevent abuse by persons purchasing HDB properties through nominees. |
| Chong Sze Pak v Chong Ser Yoong | High Court | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 80 | Singapore | Cited to show that a claim based on a trust purportedly created without prior written approval of the HDB failed, even when the plaintiff tried to salvage the claim on the basis of a resulting or constructive trust. |
| Sitiawah Bee bte Kader v Rosiyah bte Abdullah | High Court | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 606 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish from the present case, as in Sitiawah, there was no intention to create a resulting trust to defeat the objectives of the HDA, and the parties remained the registered owners of the flat. |
| Neo Boh Tan v Ng Kim Whatt | High Court | Yes | [2000] SGHC 31 | Singapore | Cited to show that the legislative intent is to prevent nominee ownership, and to emphasize that the parties had the intention of circumventing HDB regulation or policy as regards payment of a resale levy and eligibility for an HDB housing loan. |
| Lim Young Ching v Lim Tai Ching | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 103 | Singapore | Cited to show that even if a trust had been created by oral agreement, the trust would be void under s 51 of the HDA. |
| Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1048 | Singapore | Cited for the analytical framework to determine the existence of a resulting trust. |
| Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 2 SLR(R) 108 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that contributions to the cost of repairs or renovation of a property may be relevant when computing a party’s contribution to the purchase price of property. |
| Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Ethel Anne and another | High Court | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 1222 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that mortgage payments count as the borrower's contribution and not another's. |
| Sumoi Paramesvaeri v Fleury, Jeffrey Gerard and another | High Court | Yes | [2016] 5 SLR 302 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of a common intention constructive trust. |
| UDA v UDB and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 1015 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of a matrimonial asset and the possible situations in which property may come before a court that is hearing an ancillary matters proceeding. |
| Low Yin Ni and another v Tay Yuan Wei Jaycie (formerly known as Tay Yeng Choo Jessy) and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 58 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it is implausible that parents would make a generous gift to one child when they have other children. |
| VDZ v VEA | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 75 | Singapore | Cited for the importance of Therapeutic Justice in family law cases. |
| Goh Nellie v Goh Lian Teck and others | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 453 | Singapore | Cited for the doctrine of res judicata/defence of abuse of process. |
| The Royal Bank of Scotland NV (formerly known as ABN Amro Bank NV) and others v TT International Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 1104 | Singapore | Cited for the doctrine of res judicata/defence of abuse of process. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Housing and Development Act (Cap 129, 2004 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Housing and Development Board
- Resale Levy
- Nominee Arrangement
- Beneficial Ownership
- Resulting Trust
- Constructive Trust
- Matrimonial Asset
- Minimum Occupation Period
- Central Provident Fund
- SERS contra
15.2 Keywords
- HDB flat
- beneficial ownership
- resulting trust
- constructive trust
- resale levy
- nominee
- Singapore
- Housing and Development Act
16. Subjects
- Trust Law
- Property Law
- Housing Law
17. Areas of Law
- Trusts
- Land Law
- Housing Law