Lim Lina v Estate of Quick Cheng Gee, deceased

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Lee Seiu Kin J
• Judgment Date: 19 December 2011
• Neutral Citation: [2011] SGHC 267
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Originating Summons No 388 of 2011
• Published date: 22 December 2011
• Year: 2011
• Hearing Date: 03 October 2011,15 September 2011
• Plaintiff Counsel: Kee Lay Lian and Vimaljit Kaur (Rajah & Tann LLP)
• Defendant Counsel: Zaminder Singh Gill (Hillborne & Company)
• Subject Matter: Insurance,Probate and Administration,Trusts
• Citation: [2011] SGHC 267

Lee Seiu Kin J:

This is an application made by the plaintiff, seeking moneys which she claims to be entitled to pursuant to three insurance policies that her deceased husband, Mr Quick Cheng Gee (“the Deceased”), had purchased after their marriage and which she has been named the sole beneficiary of.

Background facts

The plaintiff was married to the Deceased on November 1991. They have no children. The Deceased died intestate on 30 March 2005. Madam Lu Bah Bee (“Mdm Lu”) is the mother of the Deceased. Pursuant to r 4 of s 7 of the Intestate Succession Act (Cap 146, 1985 Rev Ed), both the plaintiff and Mdm Lu are entitled to half of the Deceased’s estate (“the Estate”).

Both Mdm Lu and the plaintiff were appointed administratrices of the Estate under a grant of letters of administration extracted on 9 February 2007. Following the grant, Mdm Lu and the plaintiff opened a bank account to consolidate the Estate (“the DBS Estate Account”). Both Mdm Lu and the plaintiff are joint signatories to the DBS Estate Account.

The issue for this court’s determination concerns the proceeds of the following three insurance policies (“the AIA Insurance Policies”) purchased by the Deceased, which totalled $339,125.37: AIA policy No L531438918: $255,990.05 AIA policy No L519010251: $29,325.86 AIA policy No L110433554: $53,809.46

On the application forms for each of the AIA Insurance Policies, the plaintiff’s name, viz “Lim Lina”, was written as the sole name under the box labelled “Name of Beneficiary”. Her relationship as the Deceased’s “wife” is also indicated under the box labelled “Relationship”.

The proceeds of the AIA Insurance Policies were paid into the DBS Estate Account. The plaintiff believed that this payment was erroneous as the proceeds of the AIA Insurance Policies were actually due to her. Through her solicitors, she corresponded with Mdm Lu to request her approval for the proceeds of the AIA Insurance Policies to be taken out of the DBS Estate Account. However, Mdm Lu refused to approve the release of the proceeds.

Accordingly, the plaintiff made the present application for a declaration that she was entitled to the proceeds of the AIA Insurance Policies that have been paid into the DBS Estate Account, and that the same should be released to the plaintiff solely. The Plaintiff’s argument in support of her application was that the monies paid under the AIA Insurance Policies did not form part of the Estate, and instead belonged solely to her.

The law

Section 73(1) of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Cap 61, 1994 Rev Ed) (“CLPA”) sets out that monies payable under certain policies of assurance do not form part of the estate of the insured in the following terms:

Moneys payable under policy of assurance not to form part of the estate of the insured 73. —(1) A...