TAN SIEW KHENG v The Personal Representative of TAN SIEW HIANG (deceased)
Outcome
Application allowedI allowed the application and ordered a sale of the Property in the open market (at or above the valuation price of $2,400,000.00), and for the proceeds of the sale to be distributed to the estates of Siew Hiang and Siew Cheng in accordance with their respective shares in the Property.
Source: [2023] SGHC 268, High Court (General Division), decided 25 September 2023. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Chua Lee Ming |
| Charges / claim | Land, Probate and Administration |
| Outcome | Application allowed |
| Sentence / award | $2,400,000.00 |
| Counsel | Lee Bon Leong & Co, Bernard Sahagar s/o Tanggavelu |
Source: [2023] SGHC 268, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Case Significance
Tan Siew Kheng (personal representative of the estate of Tan Siew Cheng, deceased) v Teo Kian Kian (personal representative of the estate of Tan Siew Hiang, deceased) [2023] SGHC 268 is a grounds of decision of Chua Lee Ming J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 25 September 2023 in Originating Application No 204 of 2023. The application sought the sale of a property at No. 20 Hai Sing Road, Singapore 538922. The claimant's submissions raised the question whether the court can allow one co-owner of a property to compulsorily purchase another co-owner's share, a question on which differing views had been expressed by the High Court, engaging the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act and its predecessor CLP Ordinance.
[2023] SGHC 268 explained
TAN SIEW KHENG v The Personal Representative of TAN SIEW HIANG (deceased) ([2023] SGHC 268) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 25 September 2023. It is categorised under Land and Probate and Administration. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2023] SGHC 268 about?
TAN SIEW KHENG v The Personal Representative of TAN SIEW HIANG (deceased) ([2023] SGHC 268) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Land — Sale of land” and “Probate and Administration — Personal representatives”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 268 consider?
The judgment refers to CLP Ordinance, CLP Ordinance was amended by The Conveyancing and Law of Property Ordinance, Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Cap 61), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
Tan Siew Kheng, as personal representative of a deceased co-owner's estate, applied for the sale of a property at No. 20 Hai Sing Road held in shares by the estates of two deceased sisters and their beneficiaries, raising whether a court can order one co-owner to compulsorily buy out another's share. The court declined to order a compulsory buy-out at valuation, holding a co-owner is entitled to sell at the open-market price. The application was allowed and a sale at or above the $2,400,000 valuation was ordered.
What was Tan Siew Kheng v Teo Kian Kian [2023] SGHC 268 about?
It was an application before Chua Lee Ming J, decided on 25 September 2023, for the sale of a property at No. 20 Hai Sing Road, raising whether one co-owner can compulsorily purchase another co-owner's share.
What was the key issue in [2023] SGHC 268?
The claimant represents the estate of Tan Siew Cheng and the defendant the estate of Tan Siew Hiang; the key issue was whether the court could order one co-owner to compulsorily buy out another's share, on which the High Court had differing views.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (7)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC 268)