Saturday, February 7, 2009
Measures To Help New HDB Flat Buyers, Existing Owners
Source : The Business Times, February 7, 2009
THE government yesterday announced measures to help existing HDB home-owners and people looking to buy a new flat.
To meet increased demand for smaller and more affordable flats, HDB will offer 2,000 studio, two- and three-room apartments each year in 2009 and 2010.
This is double last year's supply of 1,000 smaller flats. And National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan told Parliament: 'We will increase the supply of smaller and lower-priced flats further if necessary to meet demand.'
To make it easier for first-timers to buy a flat, the government also unveiled an enhanced Additional CPF Housing Grant Scheme (AHG).
Under this, the monthly income ceiling will be raised from $4,000 to $5,000, the maximum grant increased from $30,000 to $40,000 and the continuous employment condition cut from two years to one year.
The number of families benefiting from the AHG will double from about 4,000 in 2006 to about 8,000 each year.
HDB will also help existing home-owners amid the downturn.
Short-term measures to help those behind with repayments include a deferral scheme and instalment plan to pay arrears within a 'reasonable period'.
Longer-term, HDB is willing to facilitate downgrading by providing second loans on a case-by-case basis.
Mr Mah said that HDB generally does not provide loans to downgraders as they usually have enough proceeds from the sale of a larger flat.
'But for those who need help in these difficult times, HDB will be flexible and will help them with another loan to buy a smaller flat,' he said.
'So there's no overall change in policy, but recognising the situation, HDB will be more flexible to help those in difficulty.'
Elderly home-owners will also get help - through a lease buy-back scheme that starts on March 1.
Under this, HDB will allow the elderly to monetise their flats by buying back the tail-end of the lease at market value, leaving a 30-year lease for the household.
HDB is also tightening eligibility rules for heavily subsidised public rental flats. Now, an applicant's income and assets will also be considered, as well as existing rules.
Those who have previously received a housing subsidy and those who have significant savings or money from a previous flat sale will no longer qualify for a rental flat.
In addition, applicants must not have owned private property before, or have a child who owns private property or has a spare room.
The revised rules take effect immediately and are designed to manage demand and safeguard rental flats for the deserving, so they are not crowded out by the less needy.
Mr Mah said: 'There are now 4,550 applicants on the rental queue. Some are really in need of help, but they are in the queue waiting.'
HDB also plans to accelerate its rental flat building programme. By 2012, there will be 50,000 rental flats, up from 42,000 now.
THE government yesterday announced measures to help existing HDB home-owners and people looking to buy a new flat.
To meet increased demand for smaller and more affordable flats, HDB will offer 2,000 studio, two- and three-room apartments each year in 2009 and 2010.
This is double last year's supply of 1,000 smaller flats. And National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan told Parliament: 'We will increase the supply of smaller and lower-priced flats further if necessary to meet demand.'
To make it easier for first-timers to buy a flat, the government also unveiled an enhanced Additional CPF Housing Grant Scheme (AHG).
Under this, the monthly income ceiling will be raised from $4,000 to $5,000, the maximum grant increased from $30,000 to $40,000 and the continuous employment condition cut from two years to one year.
The number of families benefiting from the AHG will double from about 4,000 in 2006 to about 8,000 each year.
HDB will also help existing home-owners amid the downturn.
Short-term measures to help those behind with repayments include a deferral scheme and instalment plan to pay arrears within a 'reasonable period'.
Longer-term, HDB is willing to facilitate downgrading by providing second loans on a case-by-case basis.
Mr Mah said that HDB generally does not provide loans to downgraders as they usually have enough proceeds from the sale of a larger flat.
'But for those who need help in these difficult times, HDB will be flexible and will help them with another loan to buy a smaller flat,' he said.
'So there's no overall change in policy, but recognising the situation, HDB will be more flexible to help those in difficulty.'
Elderly home-owners will also get help - through a lease buy-back scheme that starts on March 1.
Under this, HDB will allow the elderly to monetise their flats by buying back the tail-end of the lease at market value, leaving a 30-year lease for the household.
HDB is also tightening eligibility rules for heavily subsidised public rental flats. Now, an applicant's income and assets will also be considered, as well as existing rules.
Those who have previously received a housing subsidy and those who have significant savings or money from a previous flat sale will no longer qualify for a rental flat.
In addition, applicants must not have owned private property before, or have a child who owns private property or has a spare room.
The revised rules take effect immediately and are designed to manage demand and safeguard rental flats for the deserving, so they are not crowded out by the less needy.
Mr Mah said: 'There are now 4,550 applicants on the rental queue. Some are really in need of help, but they are in the queue waiting.'
HDB also plans to accelerate its rental flat building programme. By 2012, there will be 50,000 rental flats, up from 42,000 now.
Western Suburb Gets A Rail Boost
Source : The Straits Times, Feb 6, 2009
Retail-transport hub for Boon Lay, two new MRT stations after that
TRANSPORT-WISE, things are looking up for residents in the western suburb of Boon Lay.
By the end of this month, the Boon Lay MRT station will no longer be the last one on the East-West line when two new stations farther west, Pioneer and Joo Koon, open.
And by the third quarter of the year, a retail and transport hub will open next to the Boon Lay station. The complex will house the bus interchange, along with shops - all cocooned in air-conditioned comfort.
The two new MRT stations in the west beyond Boon Lay will serve close to 35,000 people living in Jurong West or working in the Jurong Industrial Estate.
Without these two stations, residents and workers have been alighting at the Boon Lay station and then cycling, walking or taking one of the 10 feeder buses from the Boon Lay bus interchange to their final destinations.
The new stations will save them that second leg of their trip home or to work, shaving up to 15 minutes of travelling time.
Residents in the area have long complained about how long it takes them to go downtown, because they need to get to the Boon Lay station first.
Madam Maureen Ng, 50, who lives in Jurong West Street 61, takes almost an hour to get to the city to do her shopping.
With Pioneer station right next to her block, she now has a direct route downtown. This saves her the 10- to 15-minute hike to Boon Lay station.
Mr Cedric Foo, an MP for West Coast GRC, said the new stations will also reduce congestion at Boon Lay station, where those heading to Tuas usually alight to make transfers. These commuters can now choose to get off at Joo Koon station.
He noted that buses ferrying workers from Tuas to Boon Lay interchange have been stopping indiscriminately along the road, causing peak-hour traffic jams.
'I hope this will be a thing of the past,' he said.
At the upcoming integrated Boon Lay Hub, which will be like those in Toa Payoh, Ang Mo Kio and Sengkang, the new bus interchange will be part of the Jurong Point 2 shopping mall.
Its concourse will lead directly to the shops.
Madam Jamiah Maarof, 50, is glad that the currently 'hot and dirty' bus interchange will be gone.
'With air-con, it will be easier to wait for the bus,' said the housewife, who has lived in Boon Lay for 20 years.
Blueprints for integrated hubs have also been drawn up for Clementi, Bedok, Jurong East, Serangoon, Joo Koon and Marina South.
Retail-transport hub for Boon Lay, two new MRT stations after that
TRANSPORT-WISE, things are looking up for residents in the western suburb of Boon Lay.
By the end of this month, the Boon Lay MRT station will no longer be the last one on the East-West line when two new stations farther west, Pioneer and Joo Koon, open.
And by the third quarter of the year, a retail and transport hub will open next to the Boon Lay station. The complex will house the bus interchange, along with shops - all cocooned in air-conditioned comfort.
The two new MRT stations in the west beyond Boon Lay will serve close to 35,000 people living in Jurong West or working in the Jurong Industrial Estate.
Without these two stations, residents and workers have been alighting at the Boon Lay station and then cycling, walking or taking one of the 10 feeder buses from the Boon Lay bus interchange to their final destinations.
The new stations will save them that second leg of their trip home or to work, shaving up to 15 minutes of travelling time.
Residents in the area have long complained about how long it takes them to go downtown, because they need to get to the Boon Lay station first.
Madam Maureen Ng, 50, who lives in Jurong West Street 61, takes almost an hour to get to the city to do her shopping.
With Pioneer station right next to her block, she now has a direct route downtown. This saves her the 10- to 15-minute hike to Boon Lay station.
Mr Cedric Foo, an MP for West Coast GRC, said the new stations will also reduce congestion at Boon Lay station, where those heading to Tuas usually alight to make transfers. These commuters can now choose to get off at Joo Koon station.
He noted that buses ferrying workers from Tuas to Boon Lay interchange have been stopping indiscriminately along the road, causing peak-hour traffic jams.
'I hope this will be a thing of the past,' he said.
At the upcoming integrated Boon Lay Hub, which will be like those in Toa Payoh, Ang Mo Kio and Sengkang, the new bus interchange will be part of the Jurong Point 2 shopping mall.
Its concourse will lead directly to the shops.
Madam Jamiah Maarof, 50, is glad that the currently 'hot and dirty' bus interchange will be gone.
'With air-con, it will be easier to wait for the bus,' said the housewife, who has lived in Boon Lay for 20 years.
Blueprints for integrated hubs have also been drawn up for Clementi, Bedok, Jurong East, Serangoon, Joo Koon and Marina South.
ERA Told To Return $257,000 To Couple
Source : The Straits Times, Feb 6, 2009
Judge slams unethical agents who 'flip' properties for profit
A HIGH Court judge yesterday criticised the unethical behaviour of two ERA Realty Network agents and ordered the return of $257,000 to a couple who used the agency to sell their apartment.
Mr Yuen Chow Hin, an IT company vice-president, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, a housewife, had let go of their two-bedroom downtown flat at $688,000. They took their ERA agent's word that this was the best price they could get.
PHOTO: LIANHE ZAOBAO
What they did not know was that the buyer of their Riverside Piazza unit was the wife of their agent's boss, and that she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.
Yesterday, Justice Choo Han Teck ruled in favour of the Yuens, who had sued ERA for the 'secret profit' made in the second deal.
Justice Choo found that the conduct of agent Jeremy Ang and his boss, Mr Mike Parikh, senior group division director at ERA, amounted to breach of duty and fraud.
He also had a stern reminder for the industry of its ethical responsibilities, as it had emerged in court that such practices were common.
The judge concluded that it was Mr Parikh who wanted to buy the flat in order to make a quick profit during the property boom.
To distance himself from the deal, he used his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, as the buyer and Mr Ang as the seller's agent, the judge found.
Mr Ang was the link but Mr Parikh was the person behind the scheme, and his position made his subordinate's breach of contract even more reprehensible.
The misconduct was of such magnitude that the judge said he felt bound to make the reasons clear in his judgment so that no property agent could now claim ignorance.
When a property agent is engaged to sell or buy property, he has a responsibility to act in the interests of the person who appointed him - not his own, or his friends', or his relatives' or his boss', said the judge.
'This responsibility that the agent bears is the foundation of the ethical rules and contractual principles that prohibit an agent from acting in conflict of interests and reaping secret profits for himself or his friends.'
Madam Sadiq was a party to the plan carried out by her husband and Mr Ang.
'The result of the concerted efforts of Jeremy, Mike and Natassha resulted in the plaintiffs selling their flat for less than what they might have had they been properly and honestly advised,' said the judge.
Justice Choo rejected the testimony of ERA's top brass - president Jack Chua and senior vice-president Marcus Chu - that the two men had done nothing wrong.
The judge said it was clear why they thought so - Mr Chu admitted in court that he and others in the company, as well as agents in other companies, had done the same thing.
Justice Choo also rejected arguments by ERA that it was not liable for the actions of its agents, who are 'independent contractors'.
The option form had ERA's logo printed on it; the commission agreement was between Madam Wong and ERA; and the newspaper advertisements sought to persuade the public that they would have the backing of the company and its network by engaging an ERA agent.
It was also ERA - not Mr Ang - which took the couple to the Small Claims Tribunal when they refused to pay the commission on the sale.
Yesterday, a relieved Madam Wong said: 'Naturally, I'm very happy. I respect the decision of the court.'
In a statement, ERA president Jack Chua said: 'ERA intends to appeal the court decision that finds our company liable as we did not benefit from the transaction.'
Mr Jeff Foo, president of the Institute of Estate Agents, would only say the case could have been prevented if real estate agencies and their agents are licensed.
He said: 'In this way, the industry will be regulated and everybody can be held responsible and accountable for their actions.'
The institute has a code of conduct and ethics for members.
Mr Ang is not a member of IEA.
Judge slams unethical agents who 'flip' properties for profit
A HIGH Court judge yesterday criticised the unethical behaviour of two ERA Realty Network agents and ordered the return of $257,000 to a couple who used the agency to sell their apartment.
Mr Yuen Chow Hin, an IT company vice-president, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, a housewife, had let go of their two-bedroom downtown flat at $688,000. They took their ERA agent's word that this was the best price they could get.
PHOTO: LIANHE ZAOBAOWhat they did not know was that the buyer of their Riverside Piazza unit was the wife of their agent's boss, and that she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.
Yesterday, Justice Choo Han Teck ruled in favour of the Yuens, who had sued ERA for the 'secret profit' made in the second deal.
Justice Choo found that the conduct of agent Jeremy Ang and his boss, Mr Mike Parikh, senior group division director at ERA, amounted to breach of duty and fraud.
He also had a stern reminder for the industry of its ethical responsibilities, as it had emerged in court that such practices were common.
The judge concluded that it was Mr Parikh who wanted to buy the flat in order to make a quick profit during the property boom.
To distance himself from the deal, he used his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, as the buyer and Mr Ang as the seller's agent, the judge found.
Mr Ang was the link but Mr Parikh was the person behind the scheme, and his position made his subordinate's breach of contract even more reprehensible.
The misconduct was of such magnitude that the judge said he felt bound to make the reasons clear in his judgment so that no property agent could now claim ignorance.
When a property agent is engaged to sell or buy property, he has a responsibility to act in the interests of the person who appointed him - not his own, or his friends', or his relatives' or his boss', said the judge.
'This responsibility that the agent bears is the foundation of the ethical rules and contractual principles that prohibit an agent from acting in conflict of interests and reaping secret profits for himself or his friends.'
Madam Sadiq was a party to the plan carried out by her husband and Mr Ang.
'The result of the concerted efforts of Jeremy, Mike and Natassha resulted in the plaintiffs selling their flat for less than what they might have had they been properly and honestly advised,' said the judge.
Justice Choo rejected the testimony of ERA's top brass - president Jack Chua and senior vice-president Marcus Chu - that the two men had done nothing wrong.
The judge said it was clear why they thought so - Mr Chu admitted in court that he and others in the company, as well as agents in other companies, had done the same thing.
Justice Choo also rejected arguments by ERA that it was not liable for the actions of its agents, who are 'independent contractors'.
The option form had ERA's logo printed on it; the commission agreement was between Madam Wong and ERA; and the newspaper advertisements sought to persuade the public that they would have the backing of the company and its network by engaging an ERA agent.
It was also ERA - not Mr Ang - which took the couple to the Small Claims Tribunal when they refused to pay the commission on the sale.
Yesterday, a relieved Madam Wong said: 'Naturally, I'm very happy. I respect the decision of the court.'
In a statement, ERA president Jack Chua said: 'ERA intends to appeal the court decision that finds our company liable as we did not benefit from the transaction.'
Mr Jeff Foo, president of the Institute of Estate Agents, would only say the case could have been prevented if real estate agencies and their agents are licensed.
He said: 'In this way, the industry will be regulated and everybody can be held responsible and accountable for their actions.'
The institute has a code of conduct and ethics for members.
Mr Ang is not a member of IEA.
ERA To Appeal Court Order
Source: The Straits Times, Feb 6, 2009
Judge slams unethical agents who 'flip' properties for profit
ERA Realty Network, which was ordered by the High Court on Thursday to return $257,000 to a couple, has said it intends to appeal the court decision.
PHOTO: ZAO BAO, BRYAN VAN DER BEEK FOR THE STRAITS TIMES
In a statement to the media, its president Jack Chua said: 'ERA intends to appeal the court decision that finds our company liable as we did not benefit from the transaction.'
Two ERA agents were slammed by High Court Judge Choo Han Teck for their unethical behaviour in the transaction of a two-bedroom downtown flat.
Mr Yuen Chow Hin, an IT company vice-president, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, a housewife, had let go of their two-bedroom downtown flat at $688,000. They took their ERA agent's word that this was the best price they could get.
ERA Senior agent Mike Parikh got his wife Madam Sadiq (above) to buy a flat sold by his subordinate Mr Ang (below). The flat was resold for a hefty profit within weeks. -- PHOTOS: ST FILE, LIANHE ZAOBAO
What they did not know was that the buyer of their Riverside Piazza unit was the wife of their agent's boss, and that she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.
On Thursday, Justice Choo ruled in favour of the Yuens, who had sued ERA for the 'secret profit' made in the second deal.
The judge found that the conduct of agent Jeremy Ang and his boss, Mr Mike Parikh, senior group division director at ERA, amounted to breach of duty and fraud. He also had a stern reminder for the industry of its ethical responsibilities, as it had emerged in court that such practices were common.
The judge concluded that it was Mr Parikh who wanted to buy the flat in order to make a quick profit during the property boom. To distance himself from the deal, he used his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, as the buyer and Mr Ang as the seller's agent, the judge found.
Mr Ang was the link but Mr Parikh was the person behind the scheme, and his position made his subordinate's breach of contract even more reprehensible. The misconduct was of such magnitude that the judge said he felt bound to make the reasons clear in his judgment so that no property agent could now claim ignorance.
'When a property agent is engaged to sell or buy property, he has a responsibility to act in the interests of the person who appointed him - not his own, or his friends', or his relatives' or his boss', said the judge. 'This responsibility that the agent bears is the foundation of the ethical rules and contractual principles that prohibit an agent from acting in conflict of interests and reaping secret profits for himself or his friends.'
WHO'S WHO:
The plaintiffs: Mr Yuen Chow Hin, 50, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, 48.
The agent: Mr Jeremy Ang, 40, who was hired by ERA senior director Mike Parikh after he was retrenched in 1999.
The boss and his wife: ERA senior group division director Mike Parikh, 44, and his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, 40.
WHAT HAPPENED
June 2007: The Yuens appoint Mr Ang to sell their Riverside Piazza apartment.
The agent says the market value is between $650,000 and $700,000, and says a 'regular client' is interested in buying the property. No valuation is done and Mr Ang omits to mention that the interested buyer is his boss' wife.
Mr Ang does not advertise the property for sale.
July 7 and July 9: Mr Parikh advertises the property for sale on behalf of his wife, Madam Sadiq, before she has an option to buy.
July 12: The Yuens give Madam Sadiq an option to buy for $688,000.
July 14: Mr Parikh places a third ad, setting the price at $945,106 and saying the property has en bloc potential. A buyer responds, and Mr Parikh handles the deal.
July 18: Madam Sadiq grants the buyer an option to buy at $945,000.
July 25: The new buyer exercises the option.
July 26: Madam Sadiq exercises her option from the Yuens.
October 2007: The couple discover the flat was resold after the CPF Board asks why they sold well below the valuation obtained by the new buyer.
Dec 19, 2007: The couple find out that Madam Sadiq is married to Mr Ang's team leader, Mr Mike Parikh.
WHAT THE JUDGE SAID: Justice Choo Han Teck said that Mr Parikh and Mr Ang were ethically wrong and in breach of contract by creating a conflict of interest between their client and themselves.
ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON DECEPTION
'Jeremy's duty to act honestly required him to disclose his boss' interest in the sale and purchase. The arrangements made and carried out by him in collaboration with Mike and his wife Natassha depended on deception.' - Justice Choo
MANY OWNERS, BUYERS AT RISK
'Mike has 200 agents working for him and we do not know how many agents the defendant has, nor how many housing agents there are in all. This kind of misconduct is never easy to discover because it is carried out in stealth and in breach of trust and far too many homeowners and potential purchasers are at risk. The defendant and its two agents have done a grave disservice to the honourable and honest members in their rank.' - Justice Choo
Judge slams unethical agents who 'flip' properties for profit
ERA Realty Network, which was ordered by the High Court on Thursday to return $257,000 to a couple, has said it intends to appeal the court decision.
PHOTO: ZAO BAO, BRYAN VAN DER BEEK FOR THE STRAITS TIMESIn a statement to the media, its president Jack Chua said: 'ERA intends to appeal the court decision that finds our company liable as we did not benefit from the transaction.'
Two ERA agents were slammed by High Court Judge Choo Han Teck for their unethical behaviour in the transaction of a two-bedroom downtown flat.
Mr Yuen Chow Hin, an IT company vice-president, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, a housewife, had let go of their two-bedroom downtown flat at $688,000. They took their ERA agent's word that this was the best price they could get.
ERA Senior agent Mike Parikh got his wife Madam Sadiq (above) to buy a flat sold by his subordinate Mr Ang (below). The flat was resold for a hefty profit within weeks. -- PHOTOS: ST FILE, LIANHE ZAOBAOWhat they did not know was that the buyer of their Riverside Piazza unit was the wife of their agent's boss, and that she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.
On Thursday, Justice Choo ruled in favour of the Yuens, who had sued ERA for the 'secret profit' made in the second deal.
The judge found that the conduct of agent Jeremy Ang and his boss, Mr Mike Parikh, senior group division director at ERA, amounted to breach of duty and fraud. He also had a stern reminder for the industry of its ethical responsibilities, as it had emerged in court that such practices were common.
The judge concluded that it was Mr Parikh who wanted to buy the flat in order to make a quick profit during the property boom. To distance himself from the deal, he used his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, as the buyer and Mr Ang as the seller's agent, the judge found.
Mr Ang was the link but Mr Parikh was the person behind the scheme, and his position made his subordinate's breach of contract even more reprehensible. The misconduct was of such magnitude that the judge said he felt bound to make the reasons clear in his judgment so that no property agent could now claim ignorance.
'When a property agent is engaged to sell or buy property, he has a responsibility to act in the interests of the person who appointed him - not his own, or his friends', or his relatives' or his boss', said the judge. 'This responsibility that the agent bears is the foundation of the ethical rules and contractual principles that prohibit an agent from acting in conflict of interests and reaping secret profits for himself or his friends.'
WHO'S WHO:The plaintiffs: Mr Yuen Chow Hin, 50, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, 48.
The agent: Mr Jeremy Ang, 40, who was hired by ERA senior director Mike Parikh after he was retrenched in 1999.
The boss and his wife: ERA senior group division director Mike Parikh, 44, and his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, 40.
WHAT HAPPENED
June 2007: The Yuens appoint Mr Ang to sell their Riverside Piazza apartment.
The agent says the market value is between $650,000 and $700,000, and says a 'regular client' is interested in buying the property. No valuation is done and Mr Ang omits to mention that the interested buyer is his boss' wife.
Mr Ang does not advertise the property for sale.
July 7 and July 9: Mr Parikh advertises the property for sale on behalf of his wife, Madam Sadiq, before she has an option to buy.
July 12: The Yuens give Madam Sadiq an option to buy for $688,000.
July 14: Mr Parikh places a third ad, setting the price at $945,106 and saying the property has en bloc potential. A buyer responds, and Mr Parikh handles the deal.
July 18: Madam Sadiq grants the buyer an option to buy at $945,000.
July 25: The new buyer exercises the option.
July 26: Madam Sadiq exercises her option from the Yuens.
October 2007: The couple discover the flat was resold after the CPF Board asks why they sold well below the valuation obtained by the new buyer.
Dec 19, 2007: The couple find out that Madam Sadiq is married to Mr Ang's team leader, Mr Mike Parikh.
WHAT THE JUDGE SAID: Justice Choo Han Teck said that Mr Parikh and Mr Ang were ethically wrong and in breach of contract by creating a conflict of interest between their client and themselves.ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON DECEPTION
'Jeremy's duty to act honestly required him to disclose his boss' interest in the sale and purchase. The arrangements made and carried out by him in collaboration with Mike and his wife Natassha depended on deception.' - Justice Choo
MANY OWNERS, BUYERS AT RISK
'Mike has 200 agents working for him and we do not know how many agents the defendant has, nor how many housing agents there are in all. This kind of misconduct is never easy to discover because it is carried out in stealth and in breach of trust and far too many homeowners and potential purchasers are at risk. The defendant and its two agents have done a grave disservice to the honourable and honest members in their rank.' - Justice Choo