Coastland Properties Pte Ltd v Lin Geok Choo

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judgment Date: 09 November 1999
• Date: 09 November 1999
• Docket Number: Suit No 765 of 1999
• Court: High Court (Singapore)

Coastland Properties Pte Ltd

Plaintiff

and

Lin Geok Choo

Defendant

[1999] SGHC 293

Choo Han Teck JC

Suit No 765 of 1999

High Court

Contract–Remedies–Specific performance–Discretion–Effect of specific performance on third party to litigation–Damages in lieu–Equity–Remedies–Specific performance–Sale and purchase of immovable property subject to mortgage–Purchase price below redemption amount of mortgage–Mortgagor unable to discharge mortgage–Purchaser unwilling to pay balance to mortgagee–Whether order of specific performance should be granted–Land–Sale of land–Remedies under uncompleted contract–Whether specific performance appropriate remedy–Whether third-party rights adversely affected–Damages in lieu

The plaintiff contracted to sell a flat, which was subject to a mortgage to a bank, to the defendant. The plaintiff failed to complete and the defendant served the requisite notice to complete. The plaintiff then sought a declaration that the contract was null and void on the ground that the contract was subject to the mortgagee's consent which was not forthcoming. The defendant counterclaimed and sued for specific performance. After the trial had commenced, the plaintiff accepted that it was in breach of contract and consented to judgment for damages to be assessed, but resisted the claim for specific performance.

The defendant did not enquire with the mortgagee or its solicitors up to the start of the trial if the mortgagee consented to the proposed sale. The parties were unable to agree whether the contract price was below the redemption amount of the mortgage, although a letter from the mortgagee showed that the redemption amount was higher than the purchase price. There was no evidence as to who was to pay the balance due to the mortgagee, although the plaintiff gave evidence that it was in no position to discharge the mortgage.

Held, dismissing the plaintiff's claim by consent and awarding damages in lieu of specific performance to the defendant:

Specific performance was not granted as the court was not satisfied that granting the order would not prejudice the mortgagee. Since the plaintiff was unable to discharge the mortgage, the defendant had to do so. However, on the evidence, the defendant was not prepared to do so. She wanted to purchase the property at a bargain price but have the plaintiff pay the balance due on the mortgage to the mortgagee: at [3] and [7].

Lim Joo Toon (Joo Toon & Co) and Catherine Lim Chui Ling (Catherine Lim & Co) for the plaintiff

Susan Tang Mei Ling (Francis Khoo & Lim) for the defendant.

Choo Han Teck JC

1 The plaintiffs were the owners of a flat at River Valley Close. They contracted to sell the flat to the defendant purchaser for $650,000 on terms set out in an option agreement dated 15 March 1999. This was not disputed although the pleadings from both sides made no mention of the date of the option agreement save in the plaintiffs' prayer in their statement of claim. At the time of the contract the property was mortgaged to the OCBC bank. Nothing was mentioned in the pleadings nor affidavits of evidence as to what the redemption amount was. The plaintiffs failed to complete and the defendant through her solicitor served the requisite notice to complete within 21...