Tay Nguang Kee Serene v Tay Yak Ping: Resulting Trusts & Family Disputes

In Tay Nguang Kee Serene v Tay Yak Ping, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute between Serene and her brother, Yak Ping, regarding the proceeds from the sale of a property. Serene claimed that the defendants, Yak Ping and their father, held the proceeds on resulting trust for her, arguing that the initial property was purchased with funds from her business, Serene Leather. Yak Ping contended that the funds belonged to their father. The court found in favor of Serene, declaring that the defendants held 96.07% of the proceeds on resulting trust for her, while Yak Ping was entitled to 3.93% due to his contribution from his Central Provident Fund.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Serene claims her brother and father hold property sale proceeds in trust for her. The court found in Serene's favor, establishing a resulting trust.

1.7 Decision Date

16 August 2021

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Tay Yak Ping	Defendant	Individual	Partial Judgment	Partial	Yeoh Oon Weng Vincent of Malkin & Maxwell LLP
Tay Sia Yong	Defendant	Individual	Partial Judgment	Partial	Yeoh Oon Weng Vincent of Malkin & Maxwell LLP
Tay Nguang Kee Serene	Plaintiff	Individual	Judgment for Plaintiff	Won	Kertar Singh s/o Guljar Singh of Kertar & Sandhu LLC Justin James Zehnder of Kertar & Sandhu LLC

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Chan Seng Onn	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Yeoh Oon Weng Vincent	Malkin & Maxwell LLP
Kertar Singh s/o Guljar Singh	Kertar & Sandhu LLC
Justin James Zehnder	Kertar & Sandhu LLC

4. Facts

Serene started a business, Serene Leather.
Serene Leather was successful, generating significant profits.
Serene instructed her parents to use the proceeds from Serene Leather to purchase an apartment.
Valley Apartment was purchased in the names of Father, Mother, and Yak Ping.
Valley Apartment was sold in an en bloc exercise.
Proceeds from Valley Apartment were used to purchase Pacific Mansion Property in the names of Father and Yak Ping.
Pacific Mansion Property was sold in an en bloc exercise for $3,268,739.39.
Father had lost mental capacity by the time of the suit.

5. Formal Citations

Tay Nguang Kee Serene v Tay Yak Ping and another, Suit No 1103 of 2019, [2021] SGHC 194

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1970-01-01	Family lived in rented shophouse.
1987-08-14	Yak Hoe passed away.
1987-12-12	Serene Leather registered as sole proprietorship.
1987-12-18	Jee Soon added as partner in Serene Leather.
1988-02-01	Serene Leather operated from shop at Westin Plaza Hotel.
1988-04-13	Father and Yak Ping added as partners in Serene Leather.
1988-09-17	Option for purchase of Valley Apartment made out to Defendants.
1996-04-20	Mother passed away.
2005-12-01	Valley Apartment sold in en bloc exercise.
2006-03-01	Defendants purchased Pacific Mansion Property.
2017-01-01	Father diagnosed with dementia.
2018-03-01	Pacific Mansion Property sold in en bloc exercise.
2019-01-01	Suit filed.
2019-02-07	Father certified to have lost mental capacity.
2021-04-06	Hearing began.
2021-04-09	Hearing continued.
2021-04-13	Hearing continued.
2021-04-14	Hearing continued.
2021-06-04	Judgment reserved.
2021-08-17	Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

Resulting Trust
- Outcome: The court found that the defendants held 96.07% of the Sum on resulting trust for Serene.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Presumption of resulting trust
  - Rebutting the presumption of resulting trust
  - Beneficial ownership
- Related Cases:
  - [1996] AC 669
Limitation of Actions
- Outcome: The court held that Serene's claim was not barred by the Limitation Act.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Applicability of Limitation Act to trust property
  - Accrual of right of action
  - Exceptions to limitation period
Doctrine of Laches
- Outcome: The court held that Serene's claim was not barred by the doctrine of laches.
- Category: Equity
- Sub-Issues:
  - Unreasonable delay
  - Prejudice to the defendant
  - Unconscionability

8. Remedies Sought

Declaration that Defendants hold the Sum on resulting trust for Plaintiff
Declaration that Defendants hold the Sum on a common intention construction trust for Plaintiff
Declaration that Defendants hold the Sum on an express trust for Plaintiff

9. Cause of Actions

Resulting Trust
Constructive Trust
Express Trust

10. Practice Areas

Trusts Litigation
Civil Litigation

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Quek Hung Heong v Tan Bee Hoon	High Court	Yes	[2014] SGHC 17	Singapore	Cited regarding the inference to be drawn from a testamentary disposition and beneficial ownership of property.
Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council	House of Lords	Yes	[1996] AC 669	England and Wales	Cited as the locus classicus for the presumption of resulting trust.
Lim Beng Kiat v Mohammad Sarman bin Saidi	High Court	Yes	[2020] SGHC 253	Singapore	Cited for accepting Lord Browne-Wilkinson's observations on resulting trusts.
Estate of Yang Chun (Mrs) née Sun Hui Min, deceased v Yang Chia-Yin	High Court	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 593	Singapore	Cited for accepting Lord Browne-Wilkinson's observations on resulting trusts.
Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and another	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2008] 2 SLR(R) 108	Singapore	Cited for accepting Lord Browne-Wilkinson's observations on resulting trusts.
Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 1048	Singapore	Cited for the presumption of resulting trust and equity's response to the lack of intention by the transferor to benefit the transferee.
BOM v BOK and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2019] 1 SLR 349	Singapore	Cited for the approach to pleadings.
eSys Technologies Pte Ltd v nTan Corporate Advisory Pte Ltd	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2013] 2 SLR 1200	Singapore	Cited for the elucidation of the doctrine of laches.
Dynasty Line Ltd v Sukamto Sia	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 277	Singapore	Cited for the elucidation of the doctrine of laches.
Sukhpreet Kaur Bajaj d/o Manjit Singh v Paramjit Singh Bajaj	High Court	Yes	[2008] SGHC 207	Singapore	Cited for the elucidation of the doctrine of laches.
Re Estate of Tan Kow Quee	High Court	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR(R) 417	Singapore	Cited for the elucidation of the doctrine of laches and the exception in s 22(1)(b) of the Limitation Act.
Tan Chin Hoon v Tan Choo Suan	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2016] 1 SLR 1150	Singapore	Cited for the exception in s 22(1)(b) of the Limitation Act and that resulting trusts are to be dealt with on the same footing as express and constructive trusts.
Ng So Hang v Wong Sang Woo	High Court	Yes	[2018] SGHC 162	Singapore	Cited that resulting trusts are to be dealt with on the same footing as express and constructive trusts.
Lim Ah Leh v Heng Fock Lin	High Court	Yes	[2018] SGHC 156	Singapore	Cited that if the defendant holds the property on resulting trust for the plaintiff, there will be no limitation bar.
Sheagar s/o T M Veloo v Belfield International (Hong Kong) Ltd	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 524	Singapore	Cited regarding findings of fact that were not pleaded.
Fu Loong Lithographer Pte Ltd v Mok Wing Chong	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2018] 4 SLR 645	Singapore	Cited regarding the purpose of pleadings.
OMG Holdings Pte Ltd v Pos Ad Sdn Bhd	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2012] 4 SLR 231	Singapore	Cited regarding evidence given at trial overcoming defects in the pleadings.
Chng Weng Wah v Goh Bak Heng	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2016] 2 SLR 464	Singapore	Cited regarding the defendant bearing the burden of proving that the doctrine of laches applies.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 18 r 18
Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 18 r 12(1)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Limitation Act (Cap 163, 1996 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Trustees Act (Cap 337, 2005 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Resulting trust
Serene Leather
Valley Apartment
Pacific Mansion Property
En bloc sale
Nominee partner
Limitation Act
Doctrine of laches

15.2 Keywords

trusts
resulting trust
family dispute
property
Singapore
High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Trust Law	90
Resulting Trust	85
Presumed Resulting Trusts	80
Chancery and Equity	70
Laches	65
Property Law	60
Limitation	50
Civil Practice	40

16. Subjects

Trusts
Equity
Civil Procedure
Limitation of Actions