Khoo Jee Chek v Lim Beng Tiong: Constructive & Resulting Trusts in Property Purchase
In Khoo Jee Chek v Lim Beng Tiong, the Singapore High Court addressed a dispute over the beneficial ownership of a commercial property. Khoo claimed a 50% ownership based on an oral agreement, while Lim asserted sole ownership or, alternatively, a 99% share. The court, finding insufficient evidence of a common intention, applied a presumed resulting trust analysis, determining the parties' beneficial interests based on their respective financial contributions to the property's purchase. The court found that Khoo held 38.38% of the beneficial interest and Lim held 61.62% of the beneficial interest in the Property.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Judgment in favour of the defendant, Lim Beng Tiong, in part. The court determined the beneficial interest in the property based on the parties' respective financial contributions.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case concerning beneficial ownership of a commercial property. Court determined shares based on financial contributions.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khoo Jee Chek | Plaintiff | Individual | Partial | Partial | |
| Lim Beng Tiong | Defendant | Individual | Partial | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Audrey Lim | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Khoo and Lim purchased a commercial property as joint tenants.
- Khoo claimed an oral agreement for equal ownership.
- Lim claimed sole ownership or a 99% share.
- The property was financed by a bank loan.
- The parties had a disagreement, leading Khoo to want his name removed from the property.
- Lim made most of the mortgage repayments.
- Khoo made some initial payments and claimed a rental agreement.
5. Formal Citations
- Khoo Jee Chek v Lim Beng Tiong, Suit No 819 of 2021, [2023] SGHC 233
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Khoo and Lim first met at Lim’s shop. | |
| Lim approached Khoo to jointly purchase a commercial property. | |
| Khoo and Lim viewed T-Space and decided to purchase the Property; Option to Purchase issued. | |
| OCBC Bank extended Loan of $560,000 to the parties. | |
| Sale and Purchase Agreement signed by the parties. | |
| First mortgage repayment made by Khoo. | |
| Temporary Occupation Permit for the Property was issued. | |
| Lim started using the Property as premises for the Temple and Shop. | |
| Parties had a disagreement on matters relating to the Temple. | |
| Certificate of Statutory Completion for the Property was issued. | |
| Lim arranged with Sally Ng to replace Khoo as the joint owner of the Property. | |
| Khoo instructed lawyers to propose sale of Property and equal division of proceeds. | |
| Khoo commenced suit against Lim. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Beneficial Ownership of Property
- Outcome: The court determined the beneficial ownership of the property based on the parties' respective financial contributions, applying the principle of presumed resulting trust.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Common intention constructive trust
- Presumed resulting trust
- Apportionment of beneficial interest
- Related Cases:
- [2014] 3 SLR 1048
- [2016] 3 SLR 1222
- Financial Contributions to Property Purchase
- Outcome: The court considered direct contributions, ancillary costs, and mortgage repayments in determining the parties' respective financial contributions to the property purchase.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Direct contributions
- Ancillary costs
- Mortgage repayments
- Related Cases:
- [2022] 2 SLR 641
8. Remedies Sought
- Order for sale of the property
- Division of sale proceeds
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Agreement
- Determination of Beneficial Interest
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Property Disputes
11. Industries
- Real Estate
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong Mun | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1048 | Singapore | Cited as the framework for determining beneficial interest in a property when parties have contributed unequal amounts and have not executed a declaration of trust. |
| Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Ethel Anne and another | High Court | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 1222 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a common intention constructive trust is applied where there is a clear common intention among the parties as to how their beneficial interests are to be held. |
| 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 the court may take into account the parties’ subsequent conduct in determining whether there is a common intention. |
| Neo Hui Ling v Ang Ah Siew | High Court | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 831 | Singapore | Cited to explain that the right of survivorship in a joint tenancy does not necessarily indicate a common intention to share the property beneficially in equal shares while both parties are alive. |
| 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 payments made towards the renovation of a property can be considered as contributions towards the purchase price if the renovations were carried out closely after the purchase and increased the value of the property. |
| Andrew Curley v Nicola Parkes | England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) | Yes | [2004] EWCA Civ 1515 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that subsequent payments of mortgage installments are not to be regarded as a direct contribution to the purchase price of the property, unless made on the basis of a prior agreement entered into when the mortgage was taken out. |
| Tay Yak Ping and another v Tay Nguang Kee Serene | High Court | Yes | [2022] 2 SLR 641 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that ancillary costs of purchasing the property (such as GST, stamp duty, legal fees and survey fees) should be taken into account in determining the parties’ beneficial interest in the Property under a resulting trust. |
| Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council | House of Lords | Yes | [1996] AC 669 | United Kingdom | Cited for the classic description of a purchase money resulting trust. |
| Currie v Hamilton | Supreme Court of New South Wales | Yes | [1984] 1 NSWLR 687 | Australia | Cited for the reasoning that what is significant is the cost to the purchasers rather than the benefit to the vendor, such that it is the aggregate cost rather than the mere purchase price that should form the basis of the calculation. |
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
- Joint tenancy
- Beneficial ownership
- Common intention constructive trust
- Presumed resulting trust
- Financial contributions
- Mortgage repayments
- Ancillary costs
- Oral agreement
15.2 Keywords
- Trusts
- Property
- Beneficial Ownership
- Singapore
- High Court
- Resulting Trust
- Constructive Trust
- Financial Contribution
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Constructive Trust | 80 |
| Resulting Trust | 80 |
| Trust Law | 75 |
| Beneficial Ownership | 70 |
| Tenants-in-common | 60 |
| Joint Tenancy | 60 |
| Financial contribution | 50 |
| Property Law | 40 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Evidence Law | 25 |
| Judgments and Orders | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Trusts
- Property Law
- Real Estate
- Equity