CH BIOVEST PTE. LTD. v ENVY ASSET MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) & 3 Ors

Q: Which legislation does [2025] SGCA 3 consider?

The judgment refers to Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20), Companies Act (Cap 50), Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Cap 61), and IRDA and the corresponding provisions of the Insolvency Act, among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2025] SGCA 3 Court of Appeal 4 February 2025 CA/CA 23/2024 56 min read

14 cases cited (12 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

We dismissed the appeal and awarded costs in the aggregate sum of $60,000 to the Liquidators, with the usual consequential orders.

Source: [2025] SGCA 3, Court of Appeal, decided 4 February 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	4 February 2025
Judges	Kannan Ramesh, Steven Chong, Sundaresh Menon
Charges / claim	Insolvency Law
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Sentence / award	$60,000
Counsel	Aldgate Chambers LLC, Shook Lin & Bok LLP, Chan Ming Onn David, Fong Zhiwei Daryl, Keerthana Narayanan, Lai Wei Kang Louis, Ooi Tsu Chong David, Pereira Kenetth Jerald, Sarah Chew Bee Lin

Source: [2025] SGCA 3, Court of Appeal, decided 4 February 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Insolvency Law — Avoidance of transactions

Practice Areas

Insolvency Law

Judges (3)

Kannan Ramesh Delivered Steven Chong Coram Sundaresh Menon Coram

Counsel (9)

Aldgate Chambers LLC Firm Shook Lin & Bok LLP Firm Chan Ming Onn David Counsel Respondent Fong Zhiwei Daryl Counsel Respondent Keerthana Narayanan Counsel Appellant Lai Wei Kang Louis Counsel Respondent Ooi Tsu Chong David Counsel Appellant Pereira Kenetth Jerald Counsel Appellant Sarah Chew Bee Lin Counsel Respondent

Parties (5)

CH Biovest Pte Ltd Appellant Envy Asset Management Pte Ltd (in liquidation) Respondent Bob Yap Cheng Ghee Respondent Tay Puay Cheng Respondent Toh Ai Ling Respondent

Case Significance

[2025] SGCA 3 is a Court of Appeal decision dated 4 February 2025 concerning Insolvency Law, specifically addressing avoidance of transactions. The judgment was delivered by Kannan Ramesh, with Steven Chong and Sundaresh Menon on the coram. The case was brought by CH Biovest Pte Ltd (appellant) against Envy Asset Management Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and others (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Aldgate Chambers LLC and Shook Lin & Bok LLP. The judgment cites 14 cases (12 Singapore, 2 foreign) and references 8 statutory provisions, including the Bankruptcy Act, the Companies Act, and the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act.

[2025] SGCA 3 explained

CH BIOVEST PTE. LTD. v ENVY ASSET MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) & 3 Ors ([2025] SGCA 3) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 4 February 2025. It is categorised under Insolvency Law. 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 [2025] SGCA 3 about?

CH BIOVEST PTE. LTD. v ENVY ASSET MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) & 3 Ors ([2025] SGCA 3) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Insolvency Law — Avoidance of transactions”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2025] SGCA 3 consider?

The judgment refers to Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20), Companies Act (Cap 50), Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Cap 61), and IRDA and the corresponding provisions of the Insolvency Act, among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGCA 3 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGCA 57 and [2024] SGHC 46. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

Summary

The liquidators of Envy Asset Management, a company that operated a Ponzi scheme purporting to trade in nickel, sought to claw back over $2 million in fictitious profits paid to investor CH Biovest. The claims were brought under the statutory avoidance provisions in s 73B of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act and s 224 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act. The Court of Appeal dismissed CH Biovest's appeal, holding that both avoidance claims were made out and the fictitious profits must be repaid to benefit all creditors.

What was decided in [2025] SGCA 3?

[2025] SGCA 3 (CH BIOVEST PTE. LTD. v ENVY ASSET MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) & 3 Ors) is a Court of Appeal decision from 4 February 2025 addressing Insolvency Law, specifically avoidance of transactions. The judgment was delivered by Kannan Ramesh.

Who were the parties in CH BIOVEST PTE. LTD. v ENVY ASSET MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) & 3 Ors ([2025] SGCA 3)?

The appellant in [2025] SGCA 3 was CH Biovest Pte Ltd, and the respondent was Envy Asset Management Pte Ltd (in liquidation), Bob Yap Cheng Ghee. Legal representation included Aldgate Chambers LLC and Shook Lin & Bok LLP. The case was decided on 4 February 2025 in the Court of Appeal.

Which judge decided [2025] SGCA 3?

[2025] SGCA 3 was delivered by Kannan Ramesh in the Court of Appeal on 4 February 2025. Steven Chong and Sundaresh Menon also sat on the coram. The case concerned Insolvency Law.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGCA 3 cite?

[2025] SGCA 3 cites 14 prior decisions, including 2 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Bankruptcy Act, Companies Act, Conveyancing and Law of Property Act.