Cheng Tim Jin v Chan Kam Piew

Cheng Tim Jin v Chan Kam Piew

The claimant failed to prove any breach of the Trust Deed or fiduciary duties because the Trust Deed did not require claimant consent or notification for the defendant’s actions under the SPA and the defendant’s termination and subsequent conduct were reasonable and prudent in light of the buyer's repudiation and non‑cooperation; alternatively, the claimant failed to prove causation because any chance of completion by the buyer was speculative rather than real or substantial; accordingly the claim is dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.

Citation
[2026] SGDC 124
Parties
Claimant: Cheng Tim Jin; Defendant: Chan Kam Piew
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
7 April 2026
Case Number
DC/OC 563/2024
Procedural Posture
Originating Claim (district Court) / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Fiduciary Duties, Loss of Chance, Termination of Sale and Purchase Agreement, Statutory Duty of Care (trustees), Causation and Quantification of Damages
Source Language
English
Trusts Fiduciary Law Contract Law Equitable Remedies Breach of Trust Fiduciary Duties Loss of Chance Termination of Sale and Purchase Agreement +2 more

Case Brief

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheng Tim Jin

Claimant

Chan Kam Piew

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Claim (district Court) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the Trust Deed or fiduciary duties in relation to the Trust Shares and the SPA
  2. 2 Whether termination of the SPA or refusal to extend it caused the claimant to lose a chance to receive $220,000
  3. 3 Whether any lost chance was real and substantial or merely speculative

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove any breach of the Trust Deed or fiduciary duties because the Trust Deed did not require claimant consent or notification for the defendant’s actions under the SPA and the defendant’s termination and subsequent conduct were reasonable and prudent in light of the buyer's repudiation and non‑cooperation; alternatively, the claimant failed to prove causation because any chance of completion by the buyer was speculative rather than real or substantial; accordingly the claim is dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed.
  • Claimant to pay costs to the defendant in the sum of SGD 41,750.