Why Singapore’s High Court Ruled an Ex-Boyfriend Owed S$321,116.40

The question in Teow Seok Phen v Chee Wei Jun was not whether the former couple had been in a relationship, but whether Ms Teow had given Mr Chee money with an expectation of repayment. The Singapore High Court found that she had and ordered him to pay S$321,116.40. 125

Why the court treated the money as loans

Mr Chee argued that Ms Teow knew of his financial difficulties and gave him the money out of “love and affection”. Against that account were his repeated promises to repay and signed documents acknowledging that he owed her money. An acknowledgement dated 10 June 2024 called him the “debtor”, called her the “creditor” and stated a debt of S$323,739.16 repayable by 31 July 2024. That figure was recorded in the document; it was not the court’s final award. 14

The court also found Mr Chee’s account unconvincing. Reporting on the judgment says he had presented himself as a wealthy pilot and cultivated an image of higher status to impress Ms Teow. That evidence formed part of the court’s assessment of his credibility, alongside the repayment promises and written acknowledgements. 456

Why the signed acknowledgements stood

Mr Chee challenged the repayment acknowledgements, including by saying one had been signed on a “no fault” basis. The court found that he had not established duress, undue influence or unconscionability that would invalidate them. The available judgment excerpts establish that outcome but do not set out enough of the court’s reasoning to attribute the rejection to a more specific finding. 12

What the S$321,116.40 award covers—and what remains unclear

The judgment excerpt identifies S$268,794 in PayNow and cash advances after accounting for Mr Chee’s partial repayments. Ms Teow also claimed S$89,945.16 in credit-card-related expenses, including interest. Reporting describes the S$321,116.40 award as covering money transferred to Mr Chee and spending on her credit cards. 226

The award exceeds the stated net advances by S$52,322.40. It therefore cannot be explained by simply adding the entire S$89,945.16 card-related claim to those advances. The available excerpts do not identify every card charge or interest amount allowed, or the precise value of Mr Chee’s earlier repayments. Those repayments are already reflected in the S$268,794 net-advances figure and should not be subtracted from it again. 125