Judgment Header
Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125
Loading…
[2012] SGHC 125
General Division of the High Court of Singapore21 Jun 2012Suit No 89 of 2010
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 7 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Later cases and laws citing this decision
“ntract if the misrepresentation was neither made on behalf of the other contracting party nor with the knowledge of the other contracting party (Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125 at [287]). Even if Foong Chong Hung had made the alleged misrepresentation, the contract between the Cla”
“will address each ground as a separate matter. There has, however, been regard to the underlying justification for lifting the corporate veil. In Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others[2012] SGHC 125 (“Tjong Very Sumito”) it was said that there were generally two justifications, first, where the evidenc”
“rporate veil (NEC Asia Pte Ltd (now known as NEC Asia Pacific Pte Ltd) v Picket & Rail Asia Pacific Pte Ltd and others [2011] 2 SLR 565 at [36]; Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125 at [76]). As noted by the Honourable Judge of the High Court Judith Prakash J (as she then was) in Sitt”
“ct. It is clear that the beneficial interest in the subject of sale immediately vests in the buyer upon entry into the sale (see the High Court decision of Tjong Very Sumito v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125 at [129]).”
“e evidence shows that the company is in fact not a separate entity. Secondly, where the corporate form is abused to further an improper purpose: Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125 at [67].”
“Shipbuilders (S) Pte Ltd and another [2014] 1 SLR 860 (“EFT Holdings”) at [112], referring to Nagase Singapore Pte Ltd v Ching Kai Huat [2008] 1 SLR(R) 80 at [23] and Tjong Very Sumito v Chan Sing En [2012] SGHC 125 at [186]):”
“a) where the evidence shows that the company is in truth not a separate legal entity; and (b) where the corporate form has been abused to further an improper purpose: Tjong Very Sumito v Chan Sing En [2012] SGHC 125 (“Tjong Very Sumito”) at [67]. According to Green Global, neither limb is satisfied here. To support its”
Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Judgment Header
Tjong Very Sumito and others v Chan Sing En and others [2012] SGHC 125
Case Metadata
Case No: Suit No 89 of 2010
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2012-06-21
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.