13 men suspected of being members of unlawful societies arrested in island-wide operation, Singapore News
The island-wide secret society suppression operation on May 23 and 24 was led by the Secret Societies Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department and supported by Jurong Police Division.
Over 40 public entertainment outlets, nightlife establishments, and food and beverage outlets, as well as close to 90 people were checked.
Police investigations against all 13 individuals are ongoing.
Anyone found guilty of being a member of an unlawful society under Section 14(3) of the Societies Act 1966 shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to $10,000 or both.
From 2022 to 2024, more than 1,300 suspected members of unlawful societies were arrested.
Figures from the Singapore Prison Service show that there has been a spike in the the number of youngsters jailed for their involvement in secret society activities under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.
[[nid:718585]]
syarifahsn@asiaone.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Singapore Law Watch
3 hours ago
- Singapore Law Watch
Investors seek court-ordered judicial management of Tokenize Xchange operator amid police probe
Investors seek court-ordered judicial management of Tokenize Xchange operator amid police probe Source: Straits Times Article Date: 07 Aug 2025 Author: Timothy Goh Hong Qi Yu, a director of AmazingTech, and the founder and chief executive of Tokenize Xchange, was charged in court on July 31 over fraudulent trading under the same Act. Seven cryptocurrency investors have applied to the High Court to place AmazingTech – the operator of embattled cryptocurrency platform Tokenize Xchange – under interim judicial management to protect their investments. If their court application on Aug 5 is successful, the High Court can appoint professional managers to take over the day-to-day running of the company and audit its assets. The Straits Times understands the seven customers have not been able to withdraw their deposits amounting to more than $4 million that are held by Tokenize Xchange. Trading of cryptocurrencies on the platform currently remains suspended. The High Court move by the seven investors comes as AmazingTech and its related entities are under investigation by the police for potential offences of fraudulent trading under the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act. Hong Qi Yu, a director of AmazingTech, and the founder and chief executive of Tokenize Xchange, was charged in court on July 31 over fraudulent trading under the same Act. The seven investors are represented by lawyers Alfred Lim, Jaime Lye and Rasveen Kaur of law firm Meritus. They are asking the High Court to appoint Mr Cameron Lindsay Duncan, Mr David Dong-Won Kim and Mr Joshua Joseph Jeyaraj of corporate advisory and restructuring firm KordaMentha as the judicial managers of AmazingTech. A court hearing has been set for Aug 21. The timeline for a judicial manager to be appointed by the High Court may take up to a few months. Meanwhile, ST understands that another law firm – Dauntless Law Chambers – is assembling more than 100 customers, owed about $40 million by Tokenize Xchange, to file a class action lawsuit against Hong personally for fraud. The Commercial Affairs Department and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said in a statement on Aug 1 that MAS had received several customer complaints against AmazingTech in mid-July about delays in withdrawing monies and digital payment tokens. On July 20, Tokenize Xchange said it would shut down the business following MAS' decision not to grant it a licence to offer digital payment token services here. It was previously operating under an exemption. The company told ST then that its customers in Singapore can no longer buy or sell cryptocurrencies on its platform and may only transfer their cryptocurrency holdings to other exchanges, where they can convert them to cash and make withdrawals. ST understands that withdrawals have been inconsistent, with many investors still unable to access their funds. MAS said in its Aug 1 statement that it found indications that the firm may have made false representations about segregating customer assets when applying for a major payment institution licence. It added that AmazingTech and its activities are not supervised or regulated by MAS and has since referred the case to the Commercial Affairs Department for investigation. ST has contacted Hong for comments, while queries for AmazingTech were unanswered. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
Singapore Law Watch
3 hours ago
- Singapore Law Watch
Park Hotel Management director breached fiduciary duty by selling assets to himself under value
Park Hotel Management director breached fiduciary duty by selling assets to himself under value Source: Straits Times Article Date: 07 Aug 2025 Author: Grace Leong The court has ruled that Allen Law transferred the viable assets and businesses of his company, Park Hotel Management, effectively to himself 'at a gross undervalue'. Mr Allen Law, the scion of Hong Kong-based billionaire Law Kar Po, was found to have breached his fiduciary duties and prejudiced the interests of creditors, while navigating his company Park Hotel Management (PHMPL) through financial challenges resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic. According to a 165-page High Court judgment released on Aug 6, Mr Law, the sole director and shareholder of PHMPL, sold assets to himself at 'gross undervalue' and diverted more than $32 million in cash and receivables for his benefit. 'When (Mr Law's) company was in financial peril, he transferred its viable assets and businesses (effectively) to himself at a gross undervalue and manipulated the books of the company to eliminate receivables owed by him and his entities, leaving the creditors with nothing,' High Court Judge Hri Kumar Nair noted. 'Far from demonstrating selflessness, Mr Law showed contempt for his fiduciary obligations... While PHMPL may have failed because of events beyond his control, his response was entirely regrettable. 'He appropriated PHMPL's assets for himself and manipulated PHMPL's books to hide his subterfuge. His conduct, both in relation to the 'restructuring' and his defence of these proceedings, was dishonest and dishonourable. His first and only thought was to benefit himself,' the judge said. Mr Law and three other companies were sued by PHMPL and its liquidators over matters relating to assets sold to entities related to him before the company was placed in liquidation in July 2021 in the wake of the pandemic, which had devastated the hospitality industry globally. The three defendant companies are Park Hotel Group Management (PHG), British Virgin Islands-incorporated Good Movement Holdings and Singapore Institute of Hospitality (SIOH). PHG and SIOH are owned by Good Movement, which in turn is owned by Mr Law, who is married to Ms Tan Shin Hui, granddaughter of former UOB chairman, the late Mr Wee Cho Yaw. She is the executive director of PHG. PHMPL was also the sole shareholder of hotel management company Park Hotel Management (Maldives), restaurant operator Yan and Park Hotel Affiliates (PHA). Due to plummeting occupancy rates and pandemic-related restrictions, Park Hotel CQ, operator of the former Park Hotel Clarke Quay property in Unity Street; and Grand Park OR, operator of the former Grand Park Orchard hotel, were unable to meet their lease obligations. Despite efforts to negotiate with landlords and seek relief under the Covid-19 (Temporary Measures) Act, PHMPL's financial position became increasingly precarious. A sale of PHMPL's assets was done in March 2021. But the liquidators said that PHMPL did not receive any consideration for the substantial assets it disposed of. This included a sum of $2.7 million for assets sold to PHG under an asset share and transfer agreement (ASTA) in March 2021. The assets included 12 hotel management agreements, licence agreements, business names, and PHMPL trademarks. The shareholdings in Park Hotel Maldives were purchased by PHG and Good Movement for US$40,000 (S$51,490), while the shareholding in Yan was purchased by Good Movement for $500,000, and the assets of the Singapore Institute of Hospitality were sold by PHMPL for $200,000. 'The effect of the agreements was that PHMPL's assets... were transferred to the defendant companies for a total sum of $3.4 million and US$40,000,' according to the judgment. 'But Mr Law... arranged it such that PHMPL did not even receive these sums,' Justice Nair said. Furthermore, the judge found that the market value of these assets amounted to $26.4 million and US$2.42 million. 'The transfer of assets and businesses from PHMPL to the defendant companies was only one part of Mr Law's plan. In the period when Park Hotel CQ and Grand Park OR were failing to meet their obligations under their respective leases, Mr Law extracted substantial amounts of cash from all three companies,' according to the ruling. In addition, Mr Law also breached the no-profit rule of the Companies Act when he diverted an opportunity to manage Park Hotel Kyoto to PHG, to the detriment of PHMPL. The second part of the plan, the judge found, 'was to cause PHMPL to declare and backdate substantial dividends in Mr Law's favour and to effect a series of transfers and set-offs in PHMPL's books, most of which were also backdated, to eliminate his and his entities' liabilities to PHMPL.' Mr Law received cash payments from PHMPL and also diverted receivables of $22.3 million due from his related companies to PHMPL. These amounts were set off against dividend declarations of $22 million and $5.9 million, and an accounting entry of $6.75 million in his favour. But the judge found that the dividend declarations were invalid as PHMPL was insolvent at the time they were made. As a result, Mr Law must repay $10.1 million in cash payments and $22.3 million in receivables. 'Given my findings that PHMPL was at the very least financially parlous by 31 December 2020 and Mr Law knew this, the cash payments were not in the interests of PHMPL and amount to breaches of Mr Law's fiduciary duties to PHMPL,' Justice Nair said. A representative from the defendants said: 'This remains a legacy matter arising from the exceptional circumstances of Covid lockdowns in 2020 and their unprecedented impact on the hospitality sector. The judgment is being reviewed and appropriate next steps are being considered.' Allen & Gledhill partners William Ong and Lee Bik Wei are acting for the plaintiffs, while Mr Law and the three defendant companies are represented by TSMP Law's senior counsel Thio Shen Yi. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Park Hotel Management Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Law Ching Hung and others [2025] SGHC 149 Print
Business Times
18 hours ago
- Business Times
Allen Law breached fiduciary duties as director of Park Hotel Management, High Court rules
[SINGAPORE] Businessman and hotelier Allen Law breached his fiduciary duties owed to his company Park Hotel Management (PHMPL) which is now in liquidation, a Singapore High Court judge ruled on Wednesday (Aug 6). 'When his company was in financial peril, he transferred its viable assets and businesses (effectively) to himself at a gross undervalue and manipulated the books of the company to eliminate receivables owed by him and his entities, leaving the creditors with nothing,' said Justice Hri Kumar Nair. Law had transferred all of PHMPL's valuable assets to three companies under his control in March 2021; in doing so, the founder of Park Hotel Group did the opposite of what the law demands, Justice Nair said. 'Law showed contempt for his fiduciary obligations – his breaches are beyond peradventure. While PHMPL may have failed because of events beyond his control, his response was entirely regrettable. He appropriated PHMPL's assets for himself and manipulated PHMPL's books to hide his subterfuge,' the judge said. ' His conduct, both in relation to the 'restructuring' and his defence of these proceedings, was dishonest and dishonourable. ' — Justice Hri Kumar Nair 'His conduct, both in relation to the 'restructuring' and his defence of these proceedings, was dishonest and dishonourable. His first and only thought was to benefit himself.' As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, the tourism, hospitality and F&B industries suffered greatly, Justice Nair noted. A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU Tuesday, 12 pm Property Insights Get an exclusive analysis of real estate and property news in Singapore and beyond. Sign Up Sign Up At first, PHMPL's subsidiaries, Park Hotel CQ (PHCQ) and Grand Park OR (GPOR), received temporary relief under the Covid-19 (Temporary Measures) Act from their contractual obligations to pay rent. PHCQ operated the Park Hotel Clarke Quay, while GPOR ran the Grand Park Orchard hotel. However, by November 2020, when the Covid-19 relief ended, PHCQ and GPOR's positions had deteriorated further, Justice Nair said. 'No solution was in sight… Mr Law knew that PHCQ and GPOR were doomed.' The landlord of GPOR, an entity known as NPP which is linked to Chinese businessman Du Shuanghua's Bright Ruby Resources, 'consistently rejected' Law's requests to revise the terms of its lease. Said Justice Nair: 'While there were some negotiations with Ascendas Hospitality Reit (ART) to adjust the rent and security deposit under Park Hotel Clarke Quay's lease, nothing materialised.' On Feb 17, 2021, PHMPL's financial controller Tang Buck Kiaw provided Law with calculations that showed both PHCQ and GPOR were expected to incur significant net losses in 2021 if the group's subsequent application for Covid-19 relief were denied. Just days later, on Feb 20, NPP issued a letter of demand to GPOR for S$1.4 million, which triggered immediate action from Law. On Feb 22, Law wrote to Tang in an e-mail, saying: 'Sounds like we have to proceed with the restructuring.' 'That 'restructuring' was the genesis of these proceedings,' Justice Nair said. The restructuring plan The first part of the restructuring was PHMPL's disposal of its assets to companies linked to Law via four written agreements, the judge said. The agreements, all dated around March 2021, resulted in PHMPL transferring several hotel management agreements; the 'Park Hotel' and 'Grand Park' brands; 135 trademarks and the holding company behind Yan restaurant and the Smoke & Mirrors bar; as well as a training academy called Singapore Institute of Hospitality, to the three companies which were ultimately owned by Law. All of PHMPL's assets, excluding PCHQ and GPOR, were transferred for a total sum of S$3.4 million and US$40,000. 'The restructuring… was in essence a plan to move PHMPL's revenue-generating assets to the defendant companies, (that is,) to himself; eliminate all liabilities owed to PHMPL by him and entities owned by him; and leave PHMPL a shell carrying only substantial liabilities,' Justice Nair said. Evidence has established that Law 'orchestrated the restructuring with Tang as his trusted aide', the judge added. Almost immediately after receiving the Feb 22, 2021, e-mail, Tang responded, asking Law: 'Who can I talk to (in order) to get this started quickly?' On the same day, Law prepared a chart setting out the new structure of the business, Justice Nair said. 'It is evident that the purpose of the restructuring was to protect PHMPL's assets from its creditors. 'Law's plan was in fact summarised in Tang's e-mail to him… where she wrote: '(we) have to do it such that (NPP and ART have) no chance to unwind.'' Tang admitted under cross-examination that she meant that she wanted to complete the transfer of assets and businesses to Law's companies so that the creditors could not unwind them. She also admitted that '(there) was a sense of urgency' because it was only a matter of time before creditors would be at the door, Justice Nair said. In June 2021, NPP filed an application to wind up PHMPL, with the company entering into liquidation on Jul 2 . When was Park Hotel insolvent? One of the key issues that arose in this case was when Park Hotel Management became insolvent. Singapore's Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act considers that if a company enters into undervalued transactions within a three-year period before it is wound up, liquidators can apply to the court to recover assets that have been transferred to another party. Justice Nair said that when he heard parties in court, Law's legal team accepted that PHMPL was insolvent by March 2021. 'They departed from that position in their closing submissions and adopted Law's evidence at trial where he maintained that PHMPL still had a viable business even after the completion of the agreements.' The test for insolvency is whether the company's current assets exceed liabilities within a 12-month timeframe. Justice Nair said there was 'no doubt that PHCQ and GPOR were insolvent or financially parlous as at December 2020.' In any event, PHMPL was insolvent at the latest by Feb 20, 2021, when NPP issued the demand for S$1.4 million, as it was 'indisputable' that the corporate guarantees would shortly be called on given that GPOR had 'neither the means nor the intention' of meeting those demands. In analysing the evidence provided by the defence's valuation expert on the value of PHMPL's assets, Justice Nair said that his analysis was 'affected by other material and adjustments he had made, which were highly selective and problematic'. Notably, Justice Nair decided that the PHMPL trademarks were worth S$1.9 million, despite them being purchased by Law's companies for just S$1. Backdating of transfers The second part of the plan, said Justice Nair, was to 'cause PHMPL to declare and backdate substantial dividends in Law's favour and to effect a series of transfers and set-offs in PHMPL's books, most of which were also backdated, to eliminate his and his entities' liabilities to PHMPL'. Around March 2021, Law got PHMPL to declare a S$22 million dividend in his favour, but backdated this to September 2020. The dividend was said to be repayment for a director's loan that Law had extended to PHMPL. During the trial, PHMPL's finance manager testified that Tang had instructed him to 'reduce or remove the account balances' and 'to look into accounts and see which are the ones that can be fully knocked off'. Another S$5.9 million was declared in favour of Law in April, after PHMPL's assets and businesses had been disposed of and PHMPL had no ability to earn revenue, Justice Nair said. Significantly, Tang expressly warned Law that declaring the $5.9 million dividend would be viewed as preference over creditors. The liquidators will have two weeks to file submissions on the reliefs they are seeking from Law and on costs. Law's legal team will have two weeks to respond. A representative of the defendants said: 'This remains a legacy matter arising from the exceptional circumstances of Covid-19 lockdowns in 2020 and their unprecedented impact on the hospitality sector. The judgment is being reviewed and appropriate next steps are being considered.' A team of lawyers, led by Allen & Gledhill's William Ong, represent the liquidators. Law and his companies are represented by lawyers from TSMP Law Corporation, led by Thio Shen Yi. Park Hotel Clarke Quay has since been rebranded as The Robertson House by The Crest Collection and is managed by The Ascott Limited. Grand Park Orchard Hotel is being operated as Pullman Singapore Orchard.
