Judgment Header
Guy Neale and others v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64
Court DecisionSGCA
[2014] SGCA 64
[2014] SGCA 64
Court of Appeal of Singapore22 Dec 2014Civil Appeal No 172 of 2013 and Summons No 2011 of 2014
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 10 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
10Later cases and laws citing this decision
“ly from the alleged settlor’s words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale y. Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v. Wan Mohamad Nawawai”
“ly from the alleged settlor’s words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v. Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v. Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1972] 1 MLRA 47).”
“epsol to profit itself and not to put itself in a position where its profit and its duty are in conflict (see R v Hopkins And Another [1915] 20 C.L.R. 464; Guy Neale and others v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64; The Board of Trustees of the Sabah Foundation & Ors v Datuk Syed Kechik bin Syed Mohamed & Anor [1999] 6”
“nly from the alleged settlor’s words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1974] 1 MLJ 41). In”
“nly from the alleged settlor’s words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1974] 1 MLJ 41). In”
Show 5 moreShow fewer
“ly from the alleged settlor's words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v. Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v. Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1972] 1 LNS 164; [”
“ly from the alleged settlor's words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v. Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v. Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1972] 1 LNS 164; [”
“ly from the alleged settlor's words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v. Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v. Wan Mohamad Nawawai [1972] 1 LNS 164; [”
“nly from the alleged settlor's words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). It is 30 34 not necessary for a trust to be in writing (Wan Naimah v Wan 5 Mohamad Nawawai [1974] 1 MLJ”
“nly from the alleged settlor's words and conduct but also of the surrounding circumstances and the interpretation of any agreements that might have been entered into (Guy Neale v Nine Squares Pty Ltd [2014] SGCA 64). [40] We are satisfied that the learned judge did not misdirect herself in applying the law. In fact, we”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Civil Appeal No 172 of 2013 and Summons No 2011 of 2014
Case Metadata
Court: Court of Appeal of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2014-12-22
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.