Kow Kim Song & Anor v KOW KIM SIANG (GAO JINGXIANG)

[2024] SGHC 231 High Court (General Division) 9 September 2024 HC/OA 581/2024 16 min read
6 cases cited (5 SG, 1 foreign)

Outcome

Application dismissed

the application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Source: [2024] SGHC 231, High Court (General Division), decided 9 September 2024. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court High Court (General Division)
Decided
Judge Goh Yihan
Charges / claim Land
Outcome Application dismissed
Counsel Adel Law LLC, Kim & Co, Lim Kim Hong, Maximilian Tay Zhan Hui, Mohammed Shakirin Bin Abdul Rashid, Nur Amalina Binte Saparin, Umar Abdullah bin Mazeli

Source: [2024] SGHC 231, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (7)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

Kow Kim Song and another v Kow Kim Siang [2024] SGHC 231 was decided by Goh Yihan J in the General Division of the High Court, with the hearing held on 8 August 2024 and grounds of decision delivered on 9 September 2024. The matter was Originating Application No 581 of 2024, in the matter of s 18 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969. The applicants, Kow Kim Song and Kow Meow Chuan (Gao Miaozhuang), applied under s 18(2) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 (2020 Rev Ed), read with the First Schedule to that Act, for the primary order that a property be sold in the open market and the net sale proceeds divided between the applicants and the respondent, Kow Kim Siang (Gao Jingxiang). The parties are biological siblings.

The catchwords identify the case as concerning land and the sale of land under court order. At the end of the hearing on 8 August 2024, Goh Yihan J dismissed the application with brief reasons, providing detailed reasons in the grounds to explain why the application was considered insufficiently particularised and premature in so far as the parties were still engaged in good faith discussions. The judgment observed that a party should not use the procedure under s 18(2) of the SCJA read with the First Schedule to cut short discussions aimed at an amicable resolution to the prospective sale of a property. The judgment referred to the Evidence Act and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. The applicants were represented by Adel Law LLC, while the respondent was represented by Kim & Co, including Lim Kim Hong.

[2024] SGHC 231 explained

Kow Kim Song & Anor v KOW KIM SIANG (GAO JINGXIANG) ([2024] SGHC 231) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 9 September 2024. It is categorised under Land. 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 [2024] SGHC 231 about?

Kow Kim Song & Anor v KOW KIM SIANG (GAO JINGXIANG) ([2024] SGHC 231) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Land — Sale of land — Sale under court order”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2024] SGHC 231 consider?

The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97) and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2024] SGHC 231 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 204. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

Summary

The applicants, Kow Kim Song and Kow Meow Chuan, applied under section 18(2) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, read with the First Schedule, for an order that a property they inherited as tenants-in-common with the respondent, their sibling Kow Kim Siang, be sold in the open market with the net proceeds divided between them. The property had belonged to their late mother, who died intestate, and the parties had been in negotiations over the respondent's purchase of the applicants' share. The High Court (Goh Yihan J) dismissed the application with costs to the respondent, finding it insufficiently particularised and premature given that the parties were still engaged in good faith discussions, and that the respondent had not behaved unreasonably and remained willing to effect a sale.

What did Kow Kim Song v Kow Kim Siang [2024] SGHC 231 decide?

Goh Yihan J dismissed the applicants' application in Originating Application No 581 of 2024 for a court-ordered sale of property under s 18(2) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969, finding it insufficiently particularised and premature while the sibling parties were still in good faith discussions.

Why was the application in Kow Kim Song v Kow Kim Siang [2024] SGHC 231 dismissed?

Goh Yihan J considered the s 18(2) SCJA application insufficiently particularised and premature, observing that a party should not use that procedure read with the First Schedule to cut short good faith discussions between the biological siblings aimed at an amicable resolution.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (6)

SLR (4)
[2015] 1 SLR 521 [2016] 3 SLR 1222 [2020] 2 SLR 1030 [2020] 3 SLR 510
UK (1)
[2010] 1 WLR 753

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 eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 231)