ROBERT TANTULAR v THE STEPHANIE KARINA

[2025] SGHC(A) 8 High Court (Appellate Division) 1 July 2025 AD/CA 45/2024

49 cases cited (42 SG, 7 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	1 July 2025
Judges	Debbie Ong Siew Ling, Mavis Chionh Sze Chyi, Woo Bih Li
Charges / claim	Trusts, Tort, Restitution, Contract, Equity, Limitation of Actions
Counsel	Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP, Shook Lin & Bok LLP, Astrid Teo, Faye Ng Jo Xuan, Joseph Tay Weiwen, Lin Ruizi, Loh Kia Meng, Mo Fei, Reuben Gavin Peter, Sarah Chew Bee Lin

Source: [2025] SGHC(A) 8, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 1 July 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Trusts — Constructive trusts Tort — Negligence — Duty of care Restitution — Unjust enrichment Trusts — Express trusts — Constitution Contract — Formation — Capacity of parties Contract — Contractual terms — Express terms Contract — Contractual terms — Implied terms Equity — Fiduciary relationships — When arising Limitation of Actions — Particular causes of action

Practice Areas

Trusts Tort Restitution Contract Equity Limitation of Actions

Judges (3)

Debbie Ong Siew Ling Coram Mavis Chionh Sze Chyi Delivered Woo Bih Li Coram

Counsel (10)

Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP Firm Shook Lin & Bok LLP Firm

Astrid Teo Counsel for the respondent

Faye Ng Jo Xuan Counsel for the respondent

Joseph Tay Weiwen Counsel for the appellant Lin Ruizi Counsel for the appellant

Loh Kia Meng Counsel for the respondent

Mo Fei Counsel for the appellant Reuben Gavin Peter Counsel for the respondent

Sarah Chew Bee Lin Counsel for the appellant

Parties (2)

Robert Tantular Appellant

The Stephanie Karina Respondent

Case Significance

[2025] SGHC(A) 8 is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision dated 1 July 2025 concerning Contract, Equity, Limitation of Actions, Restitution, Tort, and Trusts, specifically addressing constructive trusts, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The judgment was delivered by Mavis Chionh Sze Chyi, with Debbie Ong Siew Ling and Woo Bih Li on the coram. The case was brought by Robert Tantular (appellant) against The Stephanie Karina (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Shook Lin & Bok LLP and Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP. The judgment cites 49 cases (42 Singapore, 7 foreign) and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Limitation Act. This decision has been cited by 1 subsequent judgment in the dataset.

Summary

Robert Tantular sued the estate of his brother-in-law alleging misappropriation of his stake in a Dallas, Texas real estate investment known as 'The Centrum'. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal, finding the claims time-barred under the applicable limitation periods despite rejecting the defence of a consensual buy-out, and awarded $45,000 in costs.

What was decided in [2025] SGHC(A) 8?

[2025] SGHC(A) 8 (ROBERT TANTULAR v THE STEPHANIE KARINA) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 1 July 2025 addressing Contract, Equity, Limitation of Actions, Restitution, Tort, and Trusts, specifically constructive trusts, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The judgment was delivered by Mavis Chionh Sze Chyi.

Who were the parties in ROBERT TANTULAR v THE STEPHANIE KARINA ([2025] SGHC(A) 8)?

The appellant in [2025] SGHC(A) 8 was Robert Tantular, and the respondent was The Stephanie Karina. Legal representation included Shook Lin & Bok LLP and Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP. The case was decided on 1 July 2025 in the High Court (Appellate Division).

Which judge decided [2025] SGHC(A) 8?

[2025] SGHC(A) 8 was delivered by Mavis Chionh Sze Chyi in the High Court (Appellate Division) on 1 July 2025. Debbie Ong Siew Ling and Woo Bih Li also sat on the coram. The case concerned Contract, Equity, Limitation of Actions, Restitution, Tort, and Trusts.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC(A) 8 cite?

[2025] SGHC(A) 8 cites 49 prior decisions, including 7 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Limitation Act. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.

Statutes Cited

Limitation Act (Cap 163) Cases on this Act →

s 22 s 22(1) s 22(1)(a) s 22(2) s 24A s 24A(3)(a) s 24A(3)(b) s 24A(6)(a) s 6 s 6(1) s 6(7)

Cases Cited (49)

SG (10)

[2010] SGHC 163 [2011] SGHC 30 [2019] SGHC 144 [2019] SGHC 241 [2020] SGHC 106 [2020] SGHC 59 [2021] SGCA 24 [2022] SGCA 36 [2023] SGHC 270 [2024] SGHC 145

SLR (32)

[2006] 1 SLR(R) 927 [2007] 2 SLR(R) 417 [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100 [2007] 4 SLR(R) 413 [2008] 4 SLR(R) 165 [2009] 2 SLR(R) 737 [2009] 4 SLR(R) 769 [2013] 1 SLR 173 [2013] 3 SLR 801 [2013] 4 SLR 193 [2014] 3 SLR 277 [2014] 3 SLR 663 [2015] 1 SLR 1097 [2015] 5 SLR 1187 [2016] 2 SLR 464 [2016] 4 SLR 320 [2016] 5 SLR 302 [2017] 1 SLR 654 [2017] 2 SLR 592 [2018] 1 SLR 894 [2018] 2 SLR 21 [2020] 1 SLR 1199 [2020] 3 SLR 943 [2022] 1 SLR 136 [2022] 2 SLR 1250 [2023] 3 SLR 533 [2024] 1 SLR 287 [2024] 2 SLR 164 [2024] 5 SLR 1006 [2024] 5 SLR 1234 [2024] 5 SLR 481 [2025] 3 SLR 235

UK (7)

[1967] 2 AC 134 [1996] 1 AC 421 [1996] AC 669 [1998] Ch 1 [2006] 3 All ER 497 [2018] AC 275 [2020] EWHC 1022