Lee Ee Yang

Acting for a multi-million dollar company in a claim against a director, his wife and their companies for breach of fiduciary duties, dishonest assistance and conspiracy to injure. Successfully acted in a specific discovery application where the High Court held in Systematic Airconditioning Pte Ltd v Ho Seng Ken and others [2023] SGHC 10 that marital communications privilege cannot assist a litigant to resist disclosure of what he communicated to his or her spouse.

Successfully obtained a local freezing injunction against 3 defendants (i.e. prohibiting the disposal of their assets worldwide up to the value of USD 1.217 million) in the High Court in a claim on the grounds of conspiracy by lawful or unlawful means, breach of fiduciary duties, knowing receipt, dishonest assistance, breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

Successfully applied to enforce a settlement agreement valued at US$4,165,675 made pursuant to mediation at the Singapore Mediation Centre in a cross-border dispute between Vietnamese and Australian shareholders of a Singapore holding company, raising interesting issues on the grounds for setting aside an expert valuation resulting in a written judgment in Teo Lay Gek & Another v Hoang Trong Binh & Another [2019] SGHC 84.

Successfully acted for a law professor in his appeal to the High Court on a defamation claim on the defence of qualified privilege, resulting in a written judgment in Gao Shuchao v Tan Kok Quan & Ors[2018] SGHC 115.

Successfully acted for a  businesswoman in setting aside a statutory demand for the sum of over S$135,000 issued by the defendant licensed moneylender as a result of a series of “creative” refinancing transactions introduced by the defendant, resulting in a written judgment in Ang Ai Tee v Resource Credit [2017] SGHC 159; the High Court held that the loan transactions were prima facie unconscionable and substantially unfair to the client and ought to be reopened under Section 18 of the Moneylenders Act, given that Plaintiff had paid more than S$200,000 to the licensed moneylender and was further faced with a claim of S$135,879.96 for a principal loan of only S$120,000.

Acted for a prominent supplier in the food industry in their appeal before the Competition Appeals Board on liability and quantum of the fine imposed by the Competition Consumer Commission of Singapore leading to a 71% reduction of the S$1.78 million fine imposed on the clients in the largest competition prosecution on price fixing and anti-aggression pact in Singapore under Section 34 of the Competition Act, resulting in a written judgment in Gold Chic Poultry Supply Pte Ltd and others v Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore [2020] SGCAB 1.

Successfully acted for an elderly divorcee in a highly contested High Court application to obtain an order for the sale of a property. The property remained jointly owned following a divorce years ago and was worth almost S$5 million. Judgment affirmed at the appellate division

Lead counsel in an action to invalidate two wills in a contentious estate dispute worth over S$12 million on grounds of lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and suspicious circumstances.

Successfully obtained an urgent interim proprietary injunction in the Family Division of the High Court restraining two executors from disposing estate assets valued at over S$12 million.

Successfully obtained a worldwide freezing injunction in the Family Division of the High Court prohibiting an executor from disposing her personal assets for up to a value of S$5.5 million.

Successfully argued in the Court of Appeal in a landmark judgment that a property developer’s partial forfeiture of a deposit amounting to 63% of the purchase price was invalid due to it not being a true deposit in the first place, resulting in a written judgment in Li Jialin and another v Wingcrown Investment Pte Ltd [2024] SGCA 48.

Advised and acted for more than 40 subsidiary proprietors in a multimillion-dollar claim against a Singapore-listed developer’s subsidiary for exiting a S$95 million collective sale deal.

Acted for a successful businesswoman in defending claims in trust and unjust enrichment from an ex-lover of over S$8 million in real estate and movable property.

Represented a joint beneficiary of an estate in obtaining an order for sale of a shophouse worth S$ 4 million which parties to the litigation jointly inherited many years ago.

Represented a grandson sued by his grandfather for the sum of S$1.5 million allegedly paid to him as real estate commission on the grounds of inter alia, unjust enrichment and mistake.

Successfully acted for an elderly dementia patient and his donee to negotiate a settlement resolving family and property disputes over the patient’s assets, thereby ensuring the patient was adequately provided for. The disputes were highly contentious and spawned multiple sets of proceedings.

Acted for the Appellant in a Mental Capacity Act appeal to the Family Division of the High Court addressing novel questions of law regarding whether scandalous, irrelevant or oppressive allegations in an affidavit may be struck out. 

Presently advising and representing a client in the interim administration of an estate with S$10m in assets pending contested probate litigation proceedings 

Lead counsel in a Mental Capacity Act appeal to the Family Division of the High Court addressing novel questions of law regarding the concept and implementation of segmented deputyship to ensure that a patient’s best interests are optimised between two competing deputies. 

Successfully obtained a novel application for a grant pendente lite for a client embroiled in estate litigation proceedings with over S$10m in assets, in XBW v XBX and another [2024] SGHCF 30.

Successfully acted for clients in a highly contested appeal to the Family Division of the High Court to obtain deputyship orders in their favour for a dementia patient in VUW and others v VUT and another and other appeals [2021] SGHCF 41. The decision was upheld by the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore.

Successfully acted in a High Court application for a declaration that a procedurally irregular CPF nomination was legally valid and to restrain the CPF Board from disbursing the CPF funds pending the determination of the matter by the High Court in Toh Tun Li Adeline v Central Provident Fund Board and another [2023] SGHC 55.

Acted for an elderly man in applying to revoke a “deathbed gift” under the donatio mortis causa doctrine, obtaining a landmark judgment from the Singapore High Court in Koh Cheong Heng v Ho Yee Fong [2011] SGHC 48.