- Joined
- Jul 2, 2021
- Messages
- 4,651
- Points
- 113
Source: https://mothership.sg/2026/04/man-goes-to-court-to-get-back-4-luxury-watches-from-ex-dad-in-law/
A man recently took his former father-in-law to court, claiming ownership of four luxury watches he said were gifted to him by the older man before he divorced his daughter.
The father-in-law, however, argued that he had never intended to give away the watches — he had only passed the watches to his then-son-in-law to let him wear them.
In a judgment dated Mar. 30, District Judge Jonathan Ng Pang Ern stated that he dismissed the claim as the younger man does not have the right to the immediate possession of the watches.
Between June 2013 and January 2017, while they were still married, Pua received five luxury watches from Lam on separate occasions.
One, a Panerai Luminor, was undisputedly given to Pua as it was a wedding gift.
When the couple's marriage started to break down at the end of 2022, Cheryl moved out of the flat the couple had shared, taking the other four watches with her.
She later passed them back to her father.
These watches are a Hublot Big Bang, a Rolex Submariner, a Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Eight Days, and a Corum Bubble.
On Apr. 18, 2023, Pua took legal action against Lam, seeking to have the watches returned to him or be paid damages for them.
Lam, who has an extensive collection of about 200 watches, would "rotate" them within the family to keep their "mechanisms" going.
However, they were passed with the understanding that the watches continued to belong to Lam, according to both Lam and Cheryl.
At court, Cheryl testified that this applied to herself as well. When her parents passed her watches to wear, she did not own these watches, she said.
Cheryl added that Pua very often wore his digital smartwatch instead, as wearing luxury watches was "not his lifestyle".
A series of WhatsApp messages during Pua and Cheryl's marriage, in which the couple mentioned the four watches, were submitted to the court as evidence.
In one exchange, Cheryl said her father had asked why Pua never wore the watches he passed to him, but wore a "lousy" digital smartwatch instead.
Pua replied that he would wear the Rolex and the Jaeger-LeCoultre, but the Hublot was "too loud".
He added that he felt the luxury watches were "not appropriate to wear at this age...at least not for [him]".
The judge believed that, according to the messages, Pua did not appear to have much of an interest in luxury watches and was content to wear his digital smartwatch.
Ultimately, the evidence presented to the court suggested that Pua genuinely believed his former father-in-law had gifted the watches to him.
But the case depends not on his belief but on Lam's intention, the judge said in conclusion.
As Pua could not sufficiently prove that Lam had intended to give up ownership of the watches, the judge dismissed his claim.
A man recently took his former father-in-law to court, claiming ownership of four luxury watches he said were gifted to him by the older man before he divorced his daughter.
The father-in-law, however, argued that he had never intended to give away the watches — he had only passed the watches to his then-son-in-law to let him wear them.
In a judgment dated Mar. 30, District Judge Jonathan Ng Pang Ern stated that he dismissed the claim as the younger man does not have the right to the immediate possession of the watches.
Received the watches during the marriage
According to the judgment, Pua Wen Jin was married to Lam King Keow's daughter, Cheryl Lam.Between June 2013 and January 2017, while they were still married, Pua received five luxury watches from Lam on separate occasions.
One, a Panerai Luminor, was undisputedly given to Pua as it was a wedding gift.
When the couple's marriage started to break down at the end of 2022, Cheryl moved out of the flat the couple had shared, taking the other four watches with her.
She later passed them back to her father.
These watches are a Hublot Big Bang, a Rolex Submariner, a Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Eight Days, and a Corum Bubble.
On Apr. 18, 2023, Pua took legal action against Lam, seeking to have the watches returned to him or be paid damages for them.
Watches were routinely passed around in the family
Considering the way Lam shared his watches with his family, the judge believed that he did not intend to relinquish the four watches in question to Pua.Lam, who has an extensive collection of about 200 watches, would "rotate" them within the family to keep their "mechanisms" going.
However, they were passed with the understanding that the watches continued to belong to Lam, according to both Lam and Cheryl.
At court, Cheryl testified that this applied to herself as well. When her parents passed her watches to wear, she did not own these watches, she said.
Did not express interest in the watches
During the trial, Lam argued that Pua did not often wear the four watches.Cheryl added that Pua very often wore his digital smartwatch instead, as wearing luxury watches was "not his lifestyle".
A series of WhatsApp messages during Pua and Cheryl's marriage, in which the couple mentioned the four watches, were submitted to the court as evidence.
In one exchange, Cheryl said her father had asked why Pua never wore the watches he passed to him, but wore a "lousy" digital smartwatch instead.
Pua replied that he would wear the Rolex and the Jaeger-LeCoultre, but the Hublot was "too loud".
He added that he felt the luxury watches were "not appropriate to wear at this age...at least not for [him]".
The judge believed that, according to the messages, Pua did not appear to have much of an interest in luxury watches and was content to wear his digital smartwatch.
Ultimately, the evidence presented to the court suggested that Pua genuinely believed his former father-in-law had gifted the watches to him.
But the case depends not on his belief but on Lam's intention, the judge said in conclusion.
As Pua could not sufficiently prove that Lam had intended to give up ownership of the watches, the judge dismissed his claim.
