SINGAPORE — The High Court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by the daughter of the late seafood wholesaler Chew Yam Song Peter, who sought to claw back S$1.711 million her father had given to a woman before his death, ruling that the money was a voluntary gift.
Chew, who ran seafood wholesale business Evergreen Seafood, died in September 2024 at the age of 73. His daughter, Chew Boon Fong Angela, the executor of his estate, sued 39-year-old Sun Beibei for breach of fiduciary duty, alleging that Sun had withdrawn and transferred the money without authorisation while Chew was seriously ill between June and September 2024.
The disputed sum comprised S$1.625 million transferred through signed cheques and a cashier's order, plus S$86,000 in ATM withdrawals made using Chew's bank cards.
The family's case was that Chew, who had been diagnosed with stage-four colon cancer in December 2022 — which had spread to his pancreas and lungs by May 2024, leaving him with less than six months to live — had become very weak, had difficulty speaking and walking, and could not have made the withdrawals himself. The family pointed to a will Chew made in August 2024 leaving his bank savings to his wife and daughter, arguing he would not have intended to give the money to Sun. They also alleged Sun had deleted her message history with Chew after his funeral before returning his phone.
Sun denied the allegations. Her case was that she and Chew had been in a romantic relationship for about 10 years, an open secret known to his family, and that he had voluntarily given her the money so she would have financial security and a home after his death. She said she had cared for Chew devotedly through his illness, had filled in cheques at his instruction, and on one occasion guided his hand as he signed. Two months after Chew's death, she used some of the money to buy an apartment, which she later rented out.
Justice Philip Jeyaretnam found there was no doubt about Chew's mental capacity — noting that Chew had made a will on August 15, 2024, giving his Evergreen Seafood shares to his daughter and confirming an earlier gift of a residential property to his wife — and found no evidence that Sun had exercised undue influence over him. The judge accepted that Sun had been Chew's devoted caregiver, shouldering much of the caregiving burden at times almost single-handedly, and that six other witnesses supported her account.
One witness, a friend of Chew, testified that Chew had been concerned Sun was alone in Singapore, might lose her employment after his death, and would have no income or place to live. A property agent testified that Chew had spoken about supporting Sun's purchase of a property, with a budget of S$1.4 million.
The judge also noted Chew had made separate and sufficient provision for his wife and daughter, which supported the likelihood that he could have intended to provide for Sun given the care she had given him.
With the case dismissed, Sun was awarded S$182,500 in legal costs plus nine per cent GST, as well as agreed disbursements of S$10,931.91 — totalling about S$210,000. The judgment underscores that courts will not lightly undo a dying man's gifts where the evidence shows capacity and genuine affection behind them.