CHEN QIMING v HUTTONS ASIA PTE. LTD. & 2 Ors

[2024] SGHC 103 High Court (General Division) 17 April 2024 HC/S 234/2022 75 min read

7 cases cited (6 SG, 1 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	17 April 2024
Judge	S Mohan
Charges / claim	Contract, Tort, Statutory Interpretation
Counsel	Christopher Chuah Law Chambers LLC, Fervent Chambers LLC, Withers KhattarWong LLP, Chuah Chee Kian Christopher, Hoe Siew Min Deborah, Lim Chong Hian, Lin Hui Yin Sharon, Low Hong Quan

Source: [2024] SGHC 103, High Court (General Division), decided 17 April 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Contract — Formation — Certainty of terms Tort — Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit Tort — Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation Statutory Interpretation — Construction of statute — Whether Estate Agents Act 2010 and subsidiary legislation confer private rights of suits in respect of an estate agent’s breach of statutory duty

Practice Areas

Contract Tort Statutory Interpretation

Judges (1)

S Mohan Delivered

Counsel (8)

Christopher Chuah Law Chambers LLC Firm Fervent Chambers LLC Firm Withers KhattarWong LLP Firm Chuah Chee Kian Christopher Counsel Plaintiff Hoe Siew Min Deborah Counsel Plaintiff Lim Chong Hian Counsel Defendant Lin Hui Yin Sharon Counsel Defendant Low Hong Quan Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (4)

Huttons Asia Pte Ltd Defendant Chen Qiming Plaintiff Ong Jianlong Defendant Wu Lisha Defendant

Case Significance

Chen Qiming v Huttons Asia Pte Ltd and others [2024] SGHC 103 was decided by the General Division of the High Court (Suit No 234 of 2022), with S Mohan J delivering judgment on 17 April 2024 after hearings on 21-24 November 2023 and 2 February 2024. The dispute arose out of a sale and purchase of a condominium unit that went awry. The plaintiff, Chen Qiming, a national of the People's Republic of China, was the purchaser and was attended to by a real estate agent, the second defendant Ong Jianlong. Chen was granted an option to purchase and made substantial payments, but those payments were forfeited when he failed to exercise the option and pay the remainder within the time allowed. Chen sought to hold Ong responsible for his loss and also claimed that the first defendant, Huttons Asia Pte Ltd, was vicariously liable for Ong's alleged defaults. The court dismissed all of Chen's claims against both Ong and Huttons.

[2024] SGHC 103 explained

CHEN QIMING v HUTTONS ASIA PTE. LTD. & 2 Ors ([2024] SGHC 103) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 17 April 2024. It is categorised under Contract, Tort, and Statutory Interpretation. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2024] SGHC 103 about?

CHEN QIMING v HUTTONS ASIA PTE. LTD. & 2 Ors ([2024] SGHC 103) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Contract — Formation — Certainty of terms”, “Tort — Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit”, “Tort — Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation”, and “Statutory Interpretation — Construction of statute — Whether Estate Agents Act 2010 and subsidiary legislation confer private rights of suits in respect of an estate agent’s breach of statutory duty”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

How influential is [2024] SGHC 103?

Within this corpus, [2024] SGHC 103 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

Chen Qiming, the purchaser of a condominium unit who forfeited substantial payments after failing to exercise his option to purchase within the time allowed, sued the real estate agent who attended to him and the agent's agency, Huttons Asia Pte Ltd, alleging misrepresentation and seeking to hold the agency vicariously liable, with his former wife joined only as a nominal defendant. The claims raised issues of fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, certainty of contractual terms, and whether the Estate Agents Act 2010 conferred private rights of action for breach of statutory duty. The General Division of the High Court dismissed all of Chen's claims against both the agent and the agency, finding the misrepresentation and statutory-duty claims not made out and no basis for vicarious liability.

What was the outcome of Chen Qiming v Huttons Asia Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC 103?

S Mohan J dismissed all of Chen Qiming's claims against real estate agent Ong Jianlong and his agency Huttons Asia Pte Ltd. Chen had lost forfeited deposits after failing to exercise an option to purchase a condominium and sought to hold the agent and agency responsible for his loss.

What legal issues did the court consider in Chen Qiming v Huttons Asia [2024] SGHC 103?

The case involved fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, certainty of contract terms, and whether the Estate Agents Act 2010 and subsidiary legislation confer private rights of suit for an estate agent's breach of statutory duty. It also raised whether Huttons was vicariously liable for agent Ong Jianlong's alleged defaults.