Headlines published in the last 30 days are listed on SLW.

Top court dismisses appeal of woman on 'quest for revenge'

Top court dismisses appeal of woman on 'quest for revenge'

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 08 Apr 2021
Author: David Sun

The Court of Appeal noted that Ms Serene Tiong was driven by revenge and has a history of conflict with Dr Julian Ong.

A woman said to be on a "quest for revenge" against a doctor had her appeal dismissed yesterday.

Ms Serene Tiong, who was sued for defamation by Dr Julian Ong, had sought the court's permission to sue HC Surgical Specialists (HCSS) chief executive Heah Sieu Min on behalf of HCSS for alleged breach of director's duties relating to the company buying an additional 19 per cent stake in Dr Ong's firm.

The High Court dismissed her application last year after it found that she had a vendetta and lacked good faith.

Yesterday, the Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal against last year's judgment, noting that Ms Tiong was driven by revenge and has a history of conflict with Dr Ong and his friend, Dr Chan Herng Nieng. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that an adequate case to allow the appeal had not been made by Ms Tiong.

In 2018, Ms Tiong made a complaint against Dr Ong and Dr Chan, alleging they had colluded to have sex with vulnerable female patients.

Prior to the complaint, Dr Chan was having an affair with Ms Tiong, who was also his patient. She had checked his phone and found a number of messages between him and Dr Ong where they smugly boasted of their trysts with various women and described their sexual conquests in demeaning terms.

Ms Tiong had circulated the complaint, and Dr Ong sued her for defamation.

The Singapore Medical Council is currently still investigating, but had imposed restrictions on Dr Ong and Dr Chan last year.

On Sept 25, 2019, Ms Tiong bought 100 shares in HCSS so she could attend the company's annual general meeting the next day and raise concerns about the 19 per cent acquisition.

Ms Tiong alleged that Dr Heah had breached his duties to act with reasonable diligence, and that he had failed to recuse himself from the decision-making for the 19 per cent acquisition in Dr Ong's firm.

Last year, the High Court, in explaining why it dismissed Ms Tiong's application with costs, said she was "so motivated by vendetta, perceived or real, that judgment will be clouded by purely personal considerations".

Yesterday, Justice Andrew Phang said Ms Tiong's case was "wholly unmeritorious" and she was clearly on a "quest for revenge". Even if the intended legal action were successful, it would be devoid of use to the firm, he added.

He noted that the company had acted in its own business interests, and rubbished claims of Ms Tiong's supposed commercial interest in the firm as the shares she bought just a day before its AGM were worth only about $44.

"We recognise that Ms Tiong suffered deep, emotional scars, but legal relief must come via the correct route," said Justice Phang.

Ms Tiong was ordered to pay costs of $15,000 to the company and $30,000 to Dr Heah.

Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.


Latest Headlines

Singapore Law Watch / 16 Apr 2021

ADV: Career directions for the young lawyer, SAL-SCCA, 20 Apr

Ever felt like you’re at the crossroads of your career and wondered if law is the “right job” for you? Join us for a roundtable with our panelists who will share their career journeys and their motivations and feelings along the...
Business Times / 16 Apr 2021

SGX raps three former executive directors of Datapulse Technology

The directors failed to ensure that Datapulse had provided in its circular all information necessary for shareholders to make a properly informed decision on the disposal of its property at 15A Tai Seng Drive at the extraordinary general...

No content

A problem occurred while loading content.

Previous Next
What the construction industry can expect_updated 150421

Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 2021 by Singapore Academy of Law
Back To Top