Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland

Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland

The Court held the respondent's possessory title was extinguished for failure to comply with s172(8) within six months of 1 March 1994 (lapsed by 2 September 1994); alternatively the possessory title lapsed when the registered proprietor's title became unqualified on 2 April 2002 because no caveat had been lodged;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] SGCA 43
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff‑appellant): Fones Christina; Respondent (defendant‑respondent): Cheong Eng Khoon Roland
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
19 September 2005
Case Number
CA 22/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (land) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard; Judgment Delivered 19 September 2005)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment below set aside; appellant declared owner of plot A; costs to appellant here and below
Legal Topics
Possessory Title, Caveat, Land Titles Act S172(8), Indefeasibility, Mortgage and Equity of Redemption
Source Language
english
Land Property Torrens System Adverse Possession Possessory Title Caveat Land Titles Act S172(8) Indefeasibility +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fones Christina

Appellant (plaintiff‑appellant)

Cheong Eng Khoon Roland

Respondent (defendant‑respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (land) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard; Judgment Delivered 19 September 2005)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adverse possessor acquired possessory title prior to registration of the land
  2. 2 Whether possessory title is extinguished for failure to apply within six months under s172(8) of the Land Titles Act
  3. 3 Whether failure to lodge a caveat before cancellation of a caution/unqualification of title extinguishes possessory title

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the respondent's possessory title was extinguished for failure to comply with s172(8) within six months of 1 March 1994 (lapsed by 2 September 1994); alternatively the possessory title lapsed when the registered proprietor's title became unqualified on 2 April 2002 because no caveat had been lodged; accordingly the appellant remains owner of the disputed strip (plot A).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment below set aside; appellant declared owner of plot A; costs to appellant here and below

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and judgment of the High Court set aside
  • Declaration that appellant is owner of plot A