Regent Garden majority owners’ appeal rejected
ONE of Singapore’s most unusual collective sale disputes, over Regent
Garden, has been settled by the Court of Appeal even though the sale has
been done and dusted for 12 months.
In a strange twist, a total of 23 out of 25 majority owners of the West
Coast Road condo had opposed the sale even though they initially supported
it.
One of the reasons: They were upset that buyer Allgreen Properties had
paid six minority owners a total of $2 million in a ’side deal’ to share
among themselves in return for withdrawing their objections to the $34
million sale.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal seeking clarification
on this point, saying such payments are not prohibited. ‘We acknowledge
that the practice of some developers in making direct payments to minority
owners to secure their consent can be potentially divisive and may even
sometimes be ethically challenging,’ it said in its judgment. ‘This,
nevertheless, does not mean that the law, as it now stands, prohibits such
incentive payments.’
The High Court had ruled in April last year – before the project’s May
sale completion – that the sale of the 31-unit Regent Garden to Allgreen
must go ahead.
The majority owners also wanted to know if the minority owners are
entitled to retain the extra payments without sharing the sum with them.
Allgreen issued a statement saying it was an ‘unprecedented and curious
case’ of a collective sale being opposed by the majority who had initially
agreed to sell.
Although the majority owners had opted for a fixed $34 million price, they
were unhappy that a development charge payable by Allgreen to the
authorities turned out to be much lower than expected. The majority owners
then sought to renege on their agreement, after finding out about the side
deal. Before the High Court, they had complained that because Allgreen had
paid extra sums to the minority, the sale price to the majority owners was
too low. They refused to complete the deal, until ordered to do so by the
High Court.
The Court of Appeal said the sale committee sowed the seeds of its unhappy
predicament when, to save $11,000, it made a deliberate decision not to
accurately ascertain the development baseline of the property. ‘Since they
opted to seize and keep the proverbial bird in the hand, it is only just
that they cannot now be allowed to complain that the bird is not what they
thought it was,’ said its judgment.
Credo Real Estate managing director Karamjit Singh said the practical
lesson is that the sale committee must ensure it has all important
information needed before selling a property collectively so as not to
under-sell it.
The Regent Gardens case was also unusual in that it went to the Strata
Titles Board, which heard the merits of the case and threw it out even
though there were no objections.
Allgreen was represented by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh of Drew & Napier
while the majority owners were represented by Senior Counsel Molly Lim.
|