Soemarto Sulistio v Stukan Yetty Fang: Constructive & Resulting Trusts Dispute over Gold Bars Ownership

In Soemarto Sulistio v Stukan Yetty Fang, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute over the ownership of 122 gold bars. Mr. Sulistio sued Stukan Yetty Fang, Sulistio Yena, Hino Yenny Sulistio, and Sulistio Edy, seeking the return of gold bars originally purchased jointly with his late wife, Mdm Soemiati. The court, presided over by Valerie Thean J, examined the couple's intentions regarding the gold bars, particularly after Mr. Sulistio signed the 'Delivery Instructions' on the gold certificates in 2016. The defendants argued this signified a transfer of ownership to Mdm Soemiati, while Mr. Sulistio claimed a common intention constructive trust remained. The court dismissed Mr. Sulistio’s claims, finding that the common intention of the parties in 2016 had been to transfer both beneficial and legal ownership of the gold bars to Mdm Soemiati.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Mr Sulistio’s claims dismissed. The court found that the common intention of the parties in 2016 had been to transfer both beneficial and legal ownership of the gold bars to Mdm Soemiati.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Ownership dispute over gold bars purchased jointly in 1989. The court examined the couple's intent regarding the gold bars after 2016.

1.7 Decision Date

6 January 2021

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Soemarto Sulistio	Plaintiff	Individual	Claim Dismissed	Lost	Tan Yew Cheng of Tan YC Law Practice
Stukan Yetty Fang	Defendant	Individual	Judgment for Defendant	Won	Basil Ong Kah Liang of PK Wong & Nair LLC Kerri Tan Kheng Ling of PK Wong & Nair LLC
Sulistio Yena	Defendant	Individual	Judgment for Defendant	Won	Basil Ong Kah Liang of PK Wong & Nair LLC Kerri Tan Kheng Ling of PK Wong & Nair LLC
Hino Yenny Sulistio	Defendant	Individual	Judgment for Defendant	Won	Basil Ong Kah Liang of PK Wong & Nair LLC Kerri Tan Kheng Ling of PK Wong & Nair LLC
Sulistio Edy	Defendant	Individual	Judgment for Defendant	Won	Basil Ong Kah Liang of PK Wong & Nair LLC Kerri Tan Kheng Ling of PK Wong & Nair LLC
Rudy Sulistio	Defendant	Individual	Neutral	Neutral

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Valerie Thean	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Tan Yew Cheng	Tan YC Law Practice
Basil Ong Kah Liang	PK Wong & Nair LLC
Kerri Tan Kheng Ling	PK Wong & Nair LLC

4. Facts

Mr. Sulistio and Mdm Soemiati purchased 122 gold bars in 1989 in their joint names.
The gold bars were purchased with money from the couple’s joint account.
Mdm Soemiati managed the couple’s finances and kept the Original Gold Certificates in her safe.
On 17 April 2016, Mdm Soemiati asked Mr. Sulistio to sign the Original Gold Certificates under the “Delivery Instructions” section.
On 26 May 2016, Mdm Soemiati changed the ownership of the Original Gold Certificates to her sole name.
Mdm Soemiati executed a will dated 31 March 2016, bequeathing the gold bars to the defendants.
Mr. Sulistio made a declaration on 22 December 2017 stating that the gold bars had been held on trust for him by Mdm Soemiati.

5. Formal Citations

Soemarto Sulistio v Stukan Yetty Fang and others, Suit No 836 of 2019, [2021] SGHC 04

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1989-02-11	Gold bars purchased from UOB Singapore in joint names of Mr. Sulistio and Mdm Soemiati.
2016-03-31	Mdm Soemiati executed a will.
2016-04-17	Mr. Sulistio signed the Original Gold Certificates under the section with the heading “Delivery Instructions”.
2016-05-26	Mdm Soemiati changed the ownership of the Original Gold Certificates to her sole name.
2017-04-16	Mdm Soemiati passed away.
2017-05-01	Mr. Sulistio and Rudy checked the couple’s safe deposit box at UOB and discovered that Mdm Soemiati had changed the ownership of the gold bars.
2017-09-07	Yetty was granted probate by the Hong Kong Court of First Instance.
2017-09-01	Mr Sulistio fell gravely ill and was warded in the intensive care unit of a hospital in Hong Kong.
2017-11-21	Yetty lodged a caveat against the Singapore grant of letters of administration.
2017-12-22	Mr Sulistio made a declaration stating that the gold bars had been held on trust for him by Mdm Soemiati.
2018-01-24	Yetty applied to set aside the letters of administration.
2018-02-27	Mr Sulistio and Rudy commenced proceedings in Hong Kong to challenge the validity of the Will.
2019-08-23	Hong Kong proceedings were struck out by the Court of First Instance.
2019-08-26	Mr Sulistio commenced the present proceedings claiming beneficial ownership of the New Gold Certificates.
2020-09-22	Hearing date.
2020-09-29	Hearing date.
2020-09-30	Hearing date.
2020-10-01	Hearing date.
2020-10-02	Hearing date.
2020-11-23	Hearing date.
2021-01-07	Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

Common Intention Constructive Trust
- Outcome: The court found that the subsequent common intention of the parties in 2016 had been to transfer both beneficial and legal ownership of the gold bars to Mdm Soemiati.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Subsequent deviation of common intention
Presumed Resulting Trust
- Outcome: The court considered the framework for analysing beneficial interests in property disputes.
- Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

Return of gold bars

9. Cause of Actions

Breach of Trust
Claim for beneficial ownership of property

10. Practice Areas

Trust Law
Litigation

11. Industries

Banking
Financial Services

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 1048	Singapore	Articulated a structured framework for analysing beneficial interests in a property where parties have contributed unequal amounts towards the purchase price.
Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and another	High Court	Yes	[2008] 2 SLR(R) 108	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a resulting trust, if any, crystalizes at the time the property is acquired and is strictly based on the parties’ respective contributions to the purchase price of the property.
Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Ethel Anne and another	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2016] 3 SLR 1222	Singapore	Cited regarding the need to consider the initial agreement between parties at the time of acquisition, and in that specific context, whether that initial agreement has changed.
BUE and another v TZQ and another	High Court	Yes	[2019] 3 SLR 1022	Singapore	Cited regarding the analysis beginning at the point new parties enter the fray.
Low Yin Ni and another v Tay Yuen Wei Jaycie (formerly known as Tay Yeng Choo Jessy) and another	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2020] SGCA 58	Singapore	Cited regarding the analysis beginning at the point new parties enter the fray.
Graf v Hope Building Corp	New York Court of Appeals	Yes	(1920) 254 NY 1	United States	Cited for the principle that equity follows the law, “but not slavishly or always”.
Stack v Dowden	House of Lords	Yes	[2007] 2 AC 432	United Kingdom	Explained what constitutes “sufficient and compelling evidence” as normally involving discussions, statements or actions, which can fairly be said to imply a positive intention to depart from the original apportionment.
Tan Yok Koon v Tan Choo Suan and another and other appeals	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2017] 1 SLR 654	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a belated declaration is admissible.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Gold bars
Constructive trust
Resulting trust
Common intention
Delivery Instructions
Beneficial ownership
Joint account
Will
Power of attorney

15.2 Keywords

Trusts
Gold bars
Singapore
High Court
Beneficial ownership
Constructive trust
Resulting trust

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Trust Law	90
Constructive Trust	75
Resulting Trust	70
Property Law	40
Succession Law	30
Contract Law	20
Civil Procedure	10

16. Subjects

Trusts
Property Law