Re Cai Jinhong: Court Sanctions Sale of Trust Properties for Minors' Benefit

In Re Cai Jinhong, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck on November 22, 2024, addressed two originating applications by Cai Jinhong, a trustee seeking the court's sanction to sell two properties held in trust for his minor children. The court allowed the applications, finding it expedient under s 56(1) of the Trustees Act 1967 to permit the sale, ensuring the proceeds benefit the children's future despite the absence of an explicit power of sale in the trust deeds.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Applications allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Trust

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore court sanctions the sale of trust properties held for two minor children due to the trustee's financial concerns, ensuring their future benefit.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Cai JinhongApplicantIndividualApplications allowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The applicant is holding two properties on trust for his daughter and son.
  2. The trust deeds declared that the applicant had purchased two properties at Chin Swee Road under his sole name for the benefit of his daughter and son respectively.
  3. The applicant's savings are dwindling, and he fears not being able to continue paying the outstanding sums for the properties.
  4. The applicant's employment is subject to market forces, with the possibility of job loss.
  5. The applicant's parents require monetary support from him.
  6. There is an outstanding mortgage over the applicant’s family home at Serangoon Avenue 3.
  7. The trust deeds do not vest a trust for sale or a power of sale of property in the trustee.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Re Cai Jinhong, , [2024] SGHC 295
  2. In the matter of s 13(1) of the Trustees Act 1967, Originating Applications Nos 1100 and 1101 of 2024, [2024] SGHC 295

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Applicant signed two deeds of declaration of trust
Judgment reserved
Judgment reserved
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Expediency of Sale of Trust Property
    • Outcome: The court found that selling the properties was expedient for the benefit of the trust, considering the trustee's financial situation and the potential impact on the trust assets.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2020] 1 SLR 950
  2. Statutory Jurisdiction of Court
    • Outcome: The court determined that the application should have been brought under s 56(1) of the Trustees Act 1967, rather than s 13(1), as the trust deeds did not grant the trustee the power of sale.
    • Category: Jurisdictional

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Sanction to sell two properties held on trust

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Trust Administration
  • Estate Planning

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ernest Ferdinand Perez De La Sala v Compañía De Navegación Palomar, SA and othersHigh CourtYes[2020] 1 SLR 950SingaporeCited for the requirements under s 56 of the Trustees Act 1967, specifically regarding the element of expediency in trust administration.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Trustees Act 1967Singapore
Trustees Act 1967 s 13(1)Singapore
Trustees Act 1967 s 56(1)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Trust
  • Trustee
  • Trust Deeds
  • Power of Sale
  • Expediency
  • Beneficiaries
  • Trustees Act 1967
  • Originating Application

15.2 Keywords

  • Trust
  • Trustee
  • Sale of Property
  • Minor
  • Beneficiary
  • Singapore
  • Court Sanction

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Trusts and Estates95
Property Law60
Family Law10

16. Subjects

  • Trusts
  • Property Law