Goh Seng Heng v Official Assignee

Goh Seng Heng, a medical doctor, founded Aesthetic Medical Partners Pte Ltd (AMP). In an earlier suit the High Court found him liable for fraudulent misrepresentations that led Liberty Sky Investments Ltd (LSI) to buy AMP shares from him, and ordered damages based on the fall in value of the shares LSI beneficially owned, with an assessment to follow: Liberty Sky Investments Ltd v Goh Seng Heng [2020] 3 SLR 335. His appeal failed. He was adjudged bankrupt on 19 March 2020 on his own application, and the Official Assignee became trustee of his estate. On 18 June 2020 the Official Assignee admitted LSI's proof of debt at $826,966.99, relying on a letter from LSI's counsel dated 28 May 2020 which said AMP had faced a statutory demand in 2018 and was to be wound up, so its shares could be taken at zero.

In Originating Application No 101 of 2026 he sought review under ss 30 and 31 of the Bankruptcy Act of three groups of the Official Assignee's decisions. The court dismissed the application on 22 July 2026. He appealed but confined the appeal to the challenge to LSI's proof of debt, so these grounds address that part. He relied on a valuation report dated 14 July 2025 putting AMP's value at 31 December 2019 at a mid-range of $20.6 million.

1. What standard of review applies when a bankrupt asks the court under s 31 of the Bankruptcy Act to review the Official Assignee's decision on a proof of debt.
2. Whether LSI's proof of debt was properly admitted without an independent valuation of the AMP shares.
3. Whether the valuation report provided by the bankrupt justified reversing or modifying that admission.

On the standard, the court rejected both sides' positions. The applicant's prima facie test came from a corporate case on a liquidator's application under a different rule. The Official Assignee's perversity test came from a case on a trustee's day-to-day administration. Deciding a proof of debt is a quasi-judicial task of finding whether, and in what amount, a debt is owed, and s 31(2) lets the court confirm, reverse or modify the decision. The court therefore held that review is de novo, on the evidence before the court at the time of the application, as with private trustees and liquidators.

On the admission, LSI's letter supported treating the shares as worthless, and the applicant did not allege bad faith in it. There was no legal basis for requiring the Official Assignee to commission an independent valuation, and LSI had discharged its burden. The applicant had himself admitted LSI's proof on the online portal on 23 June 2020. The admitted sum was lower than the one in LSI's letter, which favoured the estate.

On the valuation report, it relied on accounts only up to 2017 for a 2019 valuation, assumed later cashflows continued unchanged without support, and was done without site visits, inspection of intangibles or interviews. The applicant had been given the chance to answer these points and offered no explanation. Even on the lower perversity standard, the decision would stand.

The court dismissed the application in full, finding no basis to disturb the admission of LSI's proof of debt (or the decisions in the other two groups), and fixed costs at $4,000 all-in, payable by the applicant to the Official Assignee.