Toh Siew Sai Thomas
This page is a record of reported Singapore judgments that name Toh Siew Sai Thomas. It is not a directory listing. Names and firms appear as they were recorded in each judgment at the time. For current practising status and firm, see the Legal Services Regulatory Authority directory.
Toh Siew Sai Thomas appears as counsel of record in 4 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026), most often before the High Court.
These cases span several subject areas, most often Family Law, and Toh Siew Sai Thomas acted for the plaintiff in 2 and the applicant in 1.
- Reported cases
- 4
- Courts
- High Court, Family Court, High Court (Family Division)
- Period
- July 2023 to August 2026
Source: derived from 4 published Singapore judgments, most recent decision .
Toh Siew Sai Thomas — Reported Cases & Litigation Record
How Toh Siew Sai Thomas appeared
- Counsel for the plaintiff
- 2 cases
- Counsel for the applicant
- 1 case
- Counsel for the appellant
- 1 case
Recorded outcomes
- Appeal dismissed
- 1
Outcome recorded for 1 of the 4 cases.
What the courts decided
-
“I dismissed the appeal.”
High Court (Family Division) · 14 July 2023 · [2023] SGHCF 31 · Counsel for the appellant · Appeal dismissed
Parties in these cases
What areas of law does Toh Siew Sai Thomas practice?
Counsel for the plaintiff (2)
-
The court ordered the net pool of $1,236,797.03 to be divided 70% to the Wife and 30% to the Husband.
Family Court · 17 August 2026 · [2026] SGFC 111 -
The High Court allowed Feida's claim in part, only to the extent of $814 for the stamp duty and penalty Feida had paid under cl 24, which Royal Autoz conceded it owed.
High Court · 18 July 2025 · [2025] SGHC 141
Counsel for the applicant (1)
-
Tan Siong Thye SJ refused Mdm Ng's application in OA 41 and allowed Mdm Chen's application in OA 44 in part, with modifications, declaring that the beneficial interests follow the legal title: Mdm…
High Court · 30 July 2025 · [2025] SGHC 145
Counsel for the appellant (1)
-
The High Court (Family Division) dismissed the appeal and upheld the order for 21 months at the Singapore Girls' Home.
High Court (Family Division) · 14 July 2023 · [2023] SGHCF 31