Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng
Outcome
Appeal dismissedwe dismiss the appeal on liability and turn to the question of the quantum of damages, which in our view is the central issue in the present appeal.
Source: [2026] SGHC(A) 13, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 28 April 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Appellate Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Kannan Ramesh, See Kee Oon, Woo Bih Li |
| Charges / claim | Tort, Land |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Counsel | GKS Law LLC, UniLegal LLC, Eric Low Eng Wan, Lai Swee Fung, Rajiv Nair |
Source: [2026] SGHC(A) 13, High Court (Appellate Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng [2026] SGHC(A) 13 is an Appellate Division judgment of 28 April 2026 concerning a property dispute between siblings who are tenants-in-common of 65 Taman Mas Merah. The respondent Lee Say Yng brought HC/OC 867/2023 against his sister Lee Cheng Mui claiming rental expenses incurred for alternative premises as a result of her alleged ouster from the property. The majority (Kannan Ramesh JAD, delivering, and See Kee Oon JAD) addressed the principles governing compensatory damages in tort for trespass to land, specifically whether and how the compensatory principle and the concept of reasonableness operate when a co-owner is ousted by another — including which party bears the burden of establishing reasonableness. Woo Bih Li JAD also sat on the panel. Counsel were GKS Law LLC (appellant) and UniLegal LLC (respondent). The case is a notable authority on ouster, trespass to land, and the quantification of compensatory damages between co-owners.
[2026] SGHC(A) 13 explained
Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng ([2026] SGHC(A) 13) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 28 April 2026. It is categorised under Tort and 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 [2026] SGHC(A) 13 about?
Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng ([2026] SGHC(A) 13) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Tort — Trespass — Land”, “Tort — Damages — Compensatory damages”, and “Land — Interest in land — Tenancy in common — Ouster”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC(A) 13 consider?
The judgment refers to Civil Law Act (Cap 43) and Evidence Act (Cap 97). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGHC(A) 13 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2025] SGHC 126. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Who bears the burden of proving reasonable compensatory damages in a sibling ouster case in Singapore ([2026] SGHC(A) 13)?
In Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng [2026] SGHC(A) 13, Kannan Ramesh JAD and See Kee Oon JAD examined whether the compensatory principle requires a claimant or defendant to establish reasonableness in damages for trespass, in a tenancy-in-common ouster dispute decided on 28 April 2026.
What was the dispute in Lee Cheng Mui v Lee Say Yng [2026] SGHC(A) 13?
Siblings Lee Say Yng and Lee Cheng Mui co-owned 65 Taman Mas Merah as tenants-in-common. Lee Say Yng claimed rental expenses for alternative premises after being ousted from the property. The Appellate Division addressed trespass to land, ouster, and the measure of compensatory damages on 28 April 2026.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (14)
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 ([2026] SGHC(A) 13)