Ng Lai Kuen v Ng Choong Keong: Resulting & Constructive Trusts Dispute

In Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla Elizabeth and others v Ng Choong Keong Steven, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore heard a case regarding the ownership of a commercial property. Three sisters (Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla Elizabeth, Ng Lai Fong Charmaine, and Ng Lai Har) sued their younger brother, Ng Choong Keong Steven, claiming he held his interest in the property on trust for their deceased father. The court found in favor of the sisters, declaring that the defendant held the property on resulting trust for the father, and consequently, each of the four siblings had a 25% beneficial interest. The defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiffs

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Siblings dispute ownership of a commercial property. Court finds defendant holds property on resulting trust for father, siblings share ownership.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla ElizabethPlaintiffIndividualJudgment in favor of PlaintiffWon
Ng Lai Fong CharmainePlaintiffIndividualJudgment in favor of PlaintiffWon
Ng Lai HarPlaintiffIndividualJudgment in favor of PlaintiffWon
Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla Elizabeth (The Administratrix of the Estate of Ng Kah Weng, Deceased)PlaintiffTrustJudgment in favor of PlaintiffWon
Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla Elizabeth (The Executrix of the Estate of Chan Wai Ching, Deceased)PlaintiffTrustJudgment in favor of PlaintiffWon
Ng Choong Keong StevenDefendantIndividualCounterclaim DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Vinodh CoomaraswamyJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiffs are three older sisters of the defendant.
  2. The dispute concerns ownership of a commercial property in Veerasamy Road.
  3. The property was conveyed to the siblings’ father and the defendant as joint tenants in November 1995.
  4. The father paid the entirety of the purchase price for the property.
  5. The father died in December 2016 and the mother died in August 2017.
  6. The father was the sole beneficial owner of the property during his lifetime.
  7. The mother left a will dividing the residue of her estate equally between the four siblings.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ng Lai Kuen Priscilla Elizabeth and others v Ng Choong Keong Steven, Suit No 169 of 2020, [2023] SGHC 343

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Father began operating hardware business at the Property
HDB offered to sell an 89-year lease of the Property to the Father
Father and defendant executed loan, security and conveyancing documents
HDB conveyed the Property into the names of the Father and the defendant as joint tenants
Father completed repaying the DBS loan
Father died
Mother died
Family meeting held
Family meeting held
Defendant received letter from HDB stating he was sole owner of Property
Defendant secured discharge of DBS’s security interest in the Property
Defendant told plaintiffs he intended to sell the Property
Defendant filed an application to have the caveat cancelled
Plaintiffs commenced this action
Trial began
Trial continued
Trial continued
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Presumed Resulting Trust
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant held his interest in the Property on resulting trust for the Father.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2008] 2 SLR(R) 108
  2. Common Intention Constructive Trust
    • Outcome: The court found no evidence that the Father and the defendant formed the common intention necessary for a constructive trust in favor of the Father.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Ambulatory Constructive Trust
    • Outcome: The court found no evidence that the defendant and the plaintiffs formed the common intention necessary for a constructive trust in favor of the plaintiffs at the family meetings in August 2017.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Rebutting Presumption of Resulting Trust
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant failed to rebut the presumption of resulting trust.
    • Category: Substantive
  5. Presumption of Advancement
    • Outcome: The court found that the presumption of advancement was rebutted on the facts of the case.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Declaration of Trust
  2. Order for Transfer of Legal Title
  3. Order for Sale of Property and Division of Proceeds

9. Cause of Actions

  • Resulting Trust
  • Constructive Trust

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Trust Litigation
  • Property Disputes

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2008] 2 SLR(R) 108SingaporeCited for the principle that a resulting trust arises when the transferor lacks the intention to benefit the transferee.
Stack v DowdenN/AYes[2007] 2 AC 432England and WalesCited to explain the conceptual difference between an imputed intention and an express or inferred intention.
Chan Yuen Lan v See Fong MunN/AYes[2014] 3 SLR 1048SingaporeCited for the framework to be applied when ascertaining the beneficial interests in a property where its joint owners make unequal contributions towards its purchase and have not declared an express trust over it.
Tan Chin Hoon and others v Tan Choo Suan (in her personal capacity and as executrix of the estate of Tan Kiam Toen, deceased) and others and other mattersHigh CourtYes[2015] SGHC 306SingaporeCited for the principle that the defendant is presumed to hold his legal interest in the Property on a resulting trust for the Father from the date the Property was purchased.
Koh Lian Chye v Koh Ah LengCourt of AppealYes[2021] SGCA 69SingaporeCited regarding the proposition that a person’s inaction with regard to a property can be a basis from which to draw an inference about his intention to benefit another with an interest in that property.
Low Yin Ni and another v Tay Yuan Wei Jaycie (formerly known as Tay Yeng Choo Jessy) and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2020] SGCA 58SingaporeCited regarding the plausibility of the parent’s intention to make a gift having regard to the financial status of the parties at the relevant time.
Comfort Management Pte Ltd v OGSP Engineering Pte Ltd and anotherN/AYes[2022] 5 SLR 525SingaporeCited for the principle that the court’s discretion to depart from the general rule of awarding costs to the successful party should be exercised judicially.
Tullio Planeta v Maoro Andrea GN/AYes[1994] 2 SLR(R) 501SingaporeCited for the principle that the general rule does not cease to operate simply because a successful party has raised issues or made allegations that have failed.
EFG Bank AG, Singapore Branch v Surewin Worldwide Ltd and othersHigh CourtYes[2022] SGHC 26SingaporeCited for the principle that the touchstone for the recoverability of costs is reasonableness.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act 1893Singapore
Rules of CourtSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Resulting trust
  • Constructive trust
  • Joint tenants
  • Right of survivorship
  • Presumption of advancement
  • Beneficial interest
  • Commercial property
  • Intestacy
  • Residuary gift
  • Family meetings

15.2 Keywords

  • trust
  • property
  • resulting trust
  • constructive trust
  • Singapore
  • High Court
  • family dispute

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Trusts
  • Real Property
  • Family Law
  • Equity