Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract In the Singapore High Court decision of Lau Sheng Jan Alistair v Lau Cheok Joo Richard and Sng Gek Hong Cynthia, Goh Yihan JC, who delivered the judgment, addressed three issues: the rule in Saunders v Vauntier, the sham trust, and the illegality defence. Goh Yihan JC’s examination of the rule in Saunders v Vauntier and the sham trust adhered to well-established principles, resulting in limited originality in that part of the analysis. In contrast, Goh Yihan JC’s exploration of the illegality defence marked the first Singapore High Court decision to investigate the application of the Ochroid test within the context of trust law. This article responds to Goh Yihan JC’s analysis of the aforementioned three issues, with a primary focus on his reasoning surrounding the illegality defence. In this comment, both the strengths and weaknesses associated with Goh Yihan JC’s reasoning are explicitly emphasised.
Hui Jing (Thu,) studied this question.