TAN HUAT CHAN v WU LEE CHOO

Q: Which legislation does [2026] SGHC(A) 15 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2026] SGHC(A) 15 High Court (Appellate Division) 13 May 2026 • AD/CA 82/2025 • 13 min read

3 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

we dismiss the appeal.

Source: [2026] SGHC(A) 15, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 13 May 2026. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	13 May 2026
Judges	Debbie Ong Siew Ling, Kannan Ramesh, See Kee Oon
Charges / claim	Family Law, Land
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	Covenant Chambers LLC, Drew & Napier LLC, Chong Yi-Liang Andrew, Johnson Loo Teck Lee, Lew Zi Qi (Liao Ziqi), Lua Wei Liang Wilbur

Source: [2026] SGHC(A) 15, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 13 May 2026 — eLitigation. Updated 2 June 2026.

Catchwords

Family Law — Consent orders Land — Sale of land — Sale under court order Land — Sale of land — Special conditions of sale

Practice Areas

Family Law Land

Judges (3)

Debbie Ong Siew Ling Delivered Kannan Ramesh Coram See Kee Oon Coram

Counsel (6)

Covenant Chambers LLC Firm Drew & Napier LLC Firm Chong Yi-Liang Andrew Counsel Respondent Johnson Loo Teck Lee Counsel Appellant Lew Zi Qi (Liao Ziqi) Counsel Appellant Lua Wei Liang Wilbur Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Tan Huat Chan Appellant Wu Lee Choo Respondent

Case Significance

Tan Huat Chan v Wu Lee Choo [2026] SGHC(A) 15, an ex tempore judgment delivered by the Appellate Division of the High Court on 13 May 2026, concerned former spouses who held the property at 15 Springside Link as equal tenants-in-common. The respondent (former wife, Wu Lee Choo) applied for the property to be sold under s 18(2) read with paragraph 2 of the First Schedule to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969. The judge below ordered the sale subject to undertakings requiring that the respondent's share of sale proceeds be used to purchase a new property to be devised to the parties' daughter, Ms Tan Suek Sian. The appellant (former husband, Tan Huat Chan) sought to set aside the order for sale, or in the alternative, sought more stringent undertakings. The Appellate Division — comprising Kannan Ramesh JAD, Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD (delivering), and See Kee Oon JAD — affirmed the order for sale but discharged the undertakings in Annex B of HC/ORC 5207/2025. Johnson Loo Teck Lee and Lew Zi Qi of Drew & Napier LLC appeared for the appellant; Chong Yi-Liang Andrew and Lua Wei Liang Wilbur of Covenant Chambers LLC appeared for the respondent.

[2026] SGHC(A) 15 explained

TAN HUAT CHAN v WU LEE CHOO ([2026] SGHC(A) 15) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 13 May 2026. It is categorised under Family Law and Land. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. 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 [2026] SGHC(A) 15 about?

TAN HUAT CHAN v WU LEE CHOO ([2026] SGHC(A) 15) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Family Law — Consent orders”, “Land — Sale of land — Sale under court order”, and “Land — Sale of land — Special conditions of sale”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2026] SGHC(A) 15 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

Tan Huat Chan appealed against an order for the sale of a jointly-owned property at 15 Springside Link under s 18(2) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969, which the former wife sought to sell as equal tenants-in-common following a 2016 consent divorce order. The dispute turned on whether a consent order clause requiring transfer of each party's share to their daughter upon death prevented a court-ordered sale. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal, affirmed the sale order, and discharged the undertakings imposed below requiring the wife to devise the new property to the daughter, ordering the appellant to pay costs of $40,000.

What did the Appellate Division decide in Tan Huat Chan v Wu Lee Choo about the sale of the Springside Link property ([2026] SGHC(A) 15)?

In [2026] SGHC(A) 15 decided on 13 May 2026, Kannan Ramesh JAD, Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD, and See Kee Oon JAD affirmed the order for sale of 15 Springside Link — owned equally by former spouses Tan Huat Chan and Wu Lee Choo — but discharged the undertakings in Annex B of HC/ORC 5207/2025 that had required the sale proceeds to purchase a new property for their daughter Ms Tan Suek Sian.