Neo Siew Teng v Public Prosecutor: Falsification of Weight Tickets & Intent to Defraud Siemens

Neo Siew Teng, director of Metallon Recycling Pte Ltd, appealed against her conviction for conspiring with Foo Yoke Jin Fonda and Seah Thiam Heng to falsify weight tickets to defraud Siemens Pte Ltd. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding that Neo Siew Teng possessed the intent to defraud Siemens by under-declaring the weight of cables, and that she engaged in a conspiracy with Foo and Seah.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Neo Siew Teng, director of Metallon Recycling, appeals conviction for falsifying weight tickets to defraud Siemens. The court dismisses the appeal, finding intent to defraud.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyConviction UpheldWon
David Menon of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Neo Siew TengAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Vincent HoongJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
David MenonAttorney-General’s Chambers
Wendell WongDrew & Napier LLC
Andrew ChuaDrew & Napier LLC
Victoria ChinDrew & Napier LLC

4. Facts

  1. The Appellant was the director of Metallon Recycling Pte Ltd.
  2. Qi Fa Hardware & Trading Pte Ltd won a bid to purchase cables from Siemens Pte Ltd.
  3. Qi Fa agreed to sell the same cables to Metallon for a lower price.
  4. The Appellant generated two sets of weight tickets: accurate and falsified.
  5. The falsified weight tickets under-declared the weight of the cables.
  6. Siemens representatives were present during the weighing of the cables.
  7. The accurate weight tickets were used for the arrangement between Metallon and Qi Fa.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Neo Siew Teng v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9213 of 2022, [2024] SGHC 83

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Magistrate’s Appeal No 9213 of 2022
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Intent to Defraud
    • Outcome: The court found that the Appellant possessed the intent to defraud Siemens by preparing falsified weight tickets that under-declared the weight of the cables.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Misrepresentation
      • Deception
      • Causation of Loss
    • Related Cases:
      • [2014] 2 SLR 393
  2. Conspiracy to Falsify Weight Tickets
    • Outcome: The court found that the Appellant engaged in a conspiracy with Foo and Seah to falsify weight tickets, despite the lack of direct communication between the Appellant and Foo.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Agreement between parties
      • Common design
      • Abetment
    • Related Cases:
      • [1993] 3 SLR(R) 302

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Appeal against Conviction

9. Cause of Actions

  • Conspiracy to Defraud
  • Falsification of Accounts

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • Recycling

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
PP v Lam Leng Hung and other appealsCourt of AppealYes[2017] 4 SLR 474SingaporeCited for the elements required to prove the charges, specifically regarding conspiracy and intent to defraud.
PP v Li Weiming and othersHigh CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 393SingaporeCited for the definition of 'intent to defraud' as practicing deception with the aim of causing injury, loss, or detriment, or obtaining an advantage.
PP v Yeo Choon PohCourt of AppealYes[1993] 3 SLR(R) 302SingaporeCited for the principle that the essence of conspiracy is an agreement between parties and that communication between each conspirator is not necessary.
R v Chew Chong JinUnknownYes[1956] MLJ 185MalaysiaCited with approval in Yeo Choon Poh for the principle that there need not be communication between each conspirator and every other, provided that there be a common design common to each of them all.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 477ASingapore
Penal Code s 108Singapore
Penal Code s 109Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Falsified Weight Tickets
  • Intent to Defraud
  • Conspiracy
  • Under-declaration of Weight
  • Siemens
  • Metallon Recycling Pte Ltd
  • Qi Fa Hardware & Trading Pte Ltd

15.2 Keywords

  • falsification
  • weight tickets
  • intent to defraud
  • conspiracy
  • criminal law
  • singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Criminal Law95
Statutory offences90
Conspiracy to Defraud85
Fraud and Deceit80
Falsification of Records70
Criminal Procedure60
Civil Procedure30

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Fraud
  • Conspiracy