Re: YAP SHIAW WEI (YE XIAOWEI)

Q: Which legislation does [2024] SGHC 232 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50), Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, and Restructuring and Dissolution Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2024] SGHC 232 High Court (General Division) 10 September 2024 • HC/OSB 47/2024 ( HC/RA 120/2024 ) • 46 min read

8 cases cited (6 SG, 2 foreign) Cited by 3 cases

Catchwords

Insolvency Law — Bankruptcy — Interim order

Practice Areas

Insolvency Law

Judges (1)

Mohamed Faizal Delivered

Counsel (11)

Allen & Gledhill LLP Firm Gavan Law Practice LLC Firm Selvam LLC Firm Shook Lin & Bok LLP Firm Whitefield Law Corporation Firm Celestine Luke Tolention Counsel Non-Party Dube Vinod Kumar Counsel Appellant Lim Jun Rui, Ivan Counsel Non-Party Ng Yeow Khoon Counsel Non-Party R Dilip Kumar Counsel Appellant Tham Xue Yi Fiona Counsel Non-Party

Parties (5)

CIMB Bank Bhd Non-Party Maybank Singapore Limited Non-Party RHB Bank Bhd Non-Party Resona Merchant Bank Asia Limited Non-Party Yap Shiaw Wei Applicant

Case Significance

Re Yap Shiaw Wei (RHB Bank Bhd and others, non-parties) [2024] SGHC 232 was decided by Mohamed Faizal JC in the General Division of the High Court on 10 September 2024, with judgment reserved after a hearing on 26 August 2024. The matter was Originating Summons (Bankruptcy) No 47 of 2024 (Registrar's Appeal No 120 of 2024), in the matter of Part 14 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018. The appeal, HC/RA 120/2024, was brought by the applicant Yap Shiaw Wei against the decision of Assistant Registrar Tan Ee Kuan, who had dismissed the application in HC/OSB 47/2024 for an interim order under Part 14 of the IRDA to facilitate consideration of a proposed voluntary arrangement. RHB Bank Bhd, CIMB Bank Bhd, Maybank Singapore Limited and Resona Merchant Bank Asia Limited appeared as non-parties.

The catchwords identify the case as concerning insolvency law, bankruptcy and an interim order. The issue on appeal was whether the draft proposal for a voluntary arrangement was "serious and viable" such that it was appropriate for the court to make an interim order under s 279(2) of the IRDA. Having considered the arguments, Mohamed Faizal JC agreed with the Assistant Registrar that the Proposal was neither serious nor viable and did not have any significant prospect of success. The judgment referred to the Companies Act and the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act. The appellant was represented by Gavan Law Practice LLC and Whitefield Law Corporation, while the non-parties were represented by Allen & Gledhill LLP, Selvam LLC and Shook Lin & Bok LLP.

[2024] SGHC 232 explained

Re: YAP SHIAW WEI (YE XIAOWEI) ([2024] SGHC 232) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 10 September 2024. It is categorised under Insolvency Law. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 3 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. 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 232 about?

Re: YAP SHIAW WEI (YE XIAOWEI) ([2024] SGHC 232) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Insolvency Law — Bankruptcy — Interim 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 232 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50), Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, and Restructuring and Dissolution Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

How influential is [2024] SGHC 232?

Within this corpus, [2024] SGHC 232 has been cited by 3 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

The appellant, Ms Yap Shiaw Wei, a former financial professional who owned or beneficially controlled numerous residential and commercial properties along Orchard Road and had accumulated substantial secured and unsecured debts, appealed against an Assistant Registrar's dismissal of her application for an interim order under Part 14 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act to facilitate consideration of a proposed voluntary arrangement. The issue was whether the draft proposal was 'serious and viable' such that an interim order under section 279(2) of the Act was appropriate. The High Court (Mohamed Faizal JC) agreed with the Assistant Registrar that the proposal was neither serious nor viable and did not have any significant prospect of success, indicating the application failed.

What did Re Yap Shiaw Wei [2024] SGHC 232 decide about the interim order?

Mohamed Faizal JC dismissed the appeal in Registrar's Appeal No 120 of 2024, agreeing with the Assistant Registrar that the proposed voluntary arrangement was neither serious nor viable, so an interim order under s 279(2) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 was not appropriate.

What was the test for an interim order considered in Re Yap Shiaw Wei [2024] SGHC 232?

The issue was whether the draft proposal for a voluntary arrangement was "serious and viable" such that the court should make an interim order under s 279(2) of the IRDA. Mohamed Faizal JC held it was neither serious nor viable and lacked any significant prospect of success.