In Goh Teh Lee v. Lim Li Pheng Maria the Court of Appeal had to consider a novel point relating to the law of co-ownership. Mr. Goh was the joint tenant of a flat together with his then wife in a development which was the subject of a proposed collective sale. All the other owners of properties in the development, including Mr. Goh's wife, had agreed to the collective sale. In fact, Mrs. Goh had appended her signature to all the relevant documents relating to the sale. Mr. Goh had raised objections to the proposed collective sale before the Strata Titles Board and the High Court, both of which had rejected his submissions and had ordered the collective sale of the development. Mr. Goh appealed to the Court of Appeal seeking to reverse the order of the High Court.

The Court of Appeal decision in Scandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (Publ), Singapore Branch v. Asia Pacific Breweries (Singapore) Pte Ltd raised many issues of law, including those of agency, banking, tort and restitution. This note will focus on the restitutionary issues. The Court of Appeal was put in a tough spot of having to balance the justice between two victims of fraud and this may have resulted in a decision that puts the law of unjust enrichment in a difficult position.

The division of an unmarried couple's beneficial interests in property following their separation remains a conundrum. In the House of Lords decision of Stack v. Dowden,2_x000D_ Baroness Hale remarked that the search is to ascertain the parties' shared intentions-actual, inferred or imputed.Yet the House of Lords did not explain exactly how such an intention could be imputed. Later cases applying Stack seem to have also neglected this possibility of imputation. The recent English Court of Appeal decision of Kernott v. Jones is important because it demonstrates that there are no less than three different ways to interpret this test in Stack. What is striking is that one of the three judgments had even taken into account events after the parties' separation when imputing their shared intentions. Although the Singapore courts have yet to consider whether or not to follow this approach in Stack, it is submitted that it is inevitable that this issue will come before our courts. Kernott makes clear the inherent difficulties in adopting the approach in Stack and the clarifications that our courts will need to make.