- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
You are very precise. This is a Advance clear mind.
I think this means when he said those words ie they, he was still in a very Chee hong mode, thinking they will have a future
Serious SPG claimed she owns Bukit Timah Condo paid by ex Boyfriend
- Thread starter Pinkieslut
- Start date
I think this means when he said those words ie they, he was still in a very Chee hong mode, thinking they will have a future
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2018
- Messages
- 17,451
- Points
- 113
What a stupid collie gene Sinkie.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 83,439
- Points
- 113
I think he got very good deal eventually.
If Mr Ngor who owns 1% decides to sell his 1% back to Ms Wong so that he can buy a new property in his sole name as his 1st property in order to avoid additional ABSD, it's ok. However, Ms Wong who buys the 1% from Mr Ngor will own 100% of the existing property and if "they" purchase a second property in joint names, it will be Ms Wong's 2nd property, and she cannot avoid additional ABSD.You are very precise. This is a Advance clear mind.
I think this means when he said those words ie they, he was still in a very Chee hong mode, thinking they will have a future
In fact, Ms Wong's lawyer should expound on this point and argue that the intention was that Mr Ngor would eventually relinquish his 1% in the existing property to Ms Wong, so that Mr Ngor could own a new property all by himself without having to pay additional ABSD. That would be evidence that Mr Ngor intended the 99% of the existing property as "gift" to Ms Wong, as he had no intention to own the existing property from the beginning.
The concept of "gift" will rebut the presumption that there was a resulting trust operating in favor of Mr Ngor.
This analysis, again, is based on @sbfuncle 's patented Art of Clear-Mindedness.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
This one is like a standby mode for Mr Ngor. So Ms wong lawyer cannot use a standby thing as a tool for attack de woh.
Then again this 99:1 thing doesn't seem to hold any meaning when the judge can leeject Ms Wong claims when it was leegistered as this ratio.
Might as well do away with ratios.
The crux of the matter is NOT whether or not there is a [resulting] trust in favor of Mr Ngor, but whether or not the resulting trust is rebutted. And resulting trust can only be rebutted by the transfer being a Gift. You can prove intention to gift by writing or verbal or inference from the circumstances. It's not a standby mode. It's directly at the heart of the intention of the Donor who is Mr Ngor.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
But, since the 99:1 ratio is ileeleevant to the judge, it also will mean, even Mr Ngor leelee transfered his 1% to Ms Wong, it also will not mean Mr wong has intention to give Ms wong 100% as a gift mah.
That is because you don't understand the concept of trust.
There is a difference between legal ownership vs beneficial ownership. It's mentioned in the article. The concept of trust is about beneficial ownership. And if a gift is established, then there is no trust. Then her 99% becomes relevant and the 99% ownership is absolute.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
Orh, Trust is commonly used within the law industry , which I'm not qualify to dispute and apply My clear mind.
I have to admit I can't beat lawyer to puppy if they bring out the laws.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
I wasn't aware there is legal and beneficial ownership.
Does it mean, the 99:1 ratio was the legal ownership, while the judge leejected Ms wong case based on beneficial ownership?
Also, does a beneficial ownership leefers to the actual amount of $ contributed by the owners ?
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 5,521
- Points
- 113
The 1 percent owner can still buy a second property without paying absd, provided he sells/transfer his share to the 99 percent owner before proceeding to buy his next property.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 10,150
- Points
- 113
Chim
As a layman, I would assume that
Legal ownership means at the time of leegistration of the property, the ratio of 99:1 means Ms owns 99% of it leegally.
While at the same time, Mr Ngor drew another will with a beneficial ownership, in such that in the event he up lorlee, his secret Will may not want to give Ms wong the full property.
But when he is still alive & kicking like now, he let Ms wong own 99% leegally first to let her song song to Jurong.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 12,530
- Points
- 113
the DUMBFARK GUY PAID 99% OF THE COST AND ONLY HAS 1% OWNERSHIP.......................??!!
the DumbFark deserve to lose his shirt
the DumbFark deserve to lose his shirt
不是這樣的。
Some more the charbo 3 years her senior. I suspect got Dae Jang Geum good looks.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 12,530
- Points
- 113
don't say girlfriend only.....................even my own mother also i won't give her ownership..............
Similar threads
