Re Aw Boon Haw (deceased)

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Chua F A J
• Judgment Date: 17 April 1967
• Neutral Citation: [1967] SGFC 8
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No Y1 of 1967
• Date: 17 April 1967
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Year: 1967
• Plaintiff Counsel: RK Booker (Allen & Gledhill)
• Citation: [1967] SGFC 8
• Defendant Counsel: Amarjit Singh Verick
• Court: Federal Court (Singapore)
• Subject Matter: Whether required to first seek leave to appeal from either High Court or Federal Court,High Court holding that security for unpaid duty to be furnished before action can proceed,Section 44(2) Estate Duty Ordinance (Cap 162, 1955 Rev Ed).,Revenue Law,Appealing against High Court decision,Estate duty

This is a motion to set aside a notice of appeal filed on 5 January 1967 by the appellant, Aw Sian (spinster), against the decision of Choor Singh J on 6 December 1966 on an application made by way of summons-in-chambers entered No 367 of 1966 in originating petition no 13 of 1966 in the High Court of Singapore.

The originating petition was taken out by the appellant as an aggrieved person under s 44(1) of the Estate Duty Ordinance (Ch 162). Section 44 provides as follows:

(1) An executor or other accountable person aggrieved by the certificate of the Commissioner under sub-s (1) of s 36, or by any claim by a notice of assessment by the Commissioner for payment of estate duty or interest thereon, or by the refusal of the Commissioner to return any estate duty or interest thereon alleged to have been overpaid, may, on payment of, or giving security as hereinafter mentioned for, the amount claimed by the Commissioner or such portion of it as is then payable by him, apply to the High Court within three months from the date of the certificate, claim or refusal, as the case may be, and the amount, of the duty and interest shall be determined by the High Court, and if the duty and interest as determined is less than that paid to the Commissioner the excess shall be repaid.

(2) No appeal shall be allowed from any order, direction, determination, or decision of the High Court upon any application under this section except with the leave of the High Court or Federal Court.

(3) The costs of the application shall be in the discretion of the court, and the court, where it appears to the court just, may order the Commissioner to pay on any excess of duty or interest repaid by him interest at the rate of six per centum per annum for such a period as appears to the court just.

(4) The High Court, if satisfied that it would impose hardship to require the applicant, as a condition of the application, to pay the whole, or as the case may be, any part of the duty claimed by the Commissioner or of such portion of it as is then payable by him, may allow the application to be brought on payment of no duty, or of such part only of the duty as to the court seems reasonable, and on security to the satisfaction of the court being given for the duty, or so much of the duty as is not so paid, but in such case the court may order interest at the rate of six per centum per annum to be paid on the unpaid duty so far as it becomes payable under the...