# MND's 27 May 2015 Response to Media Queries on High Court Judgement

- **Source:** Ministry of National Development
- **Published:** 2015-05-27T13:45:00.000Z
- **Author:** Ministry of National Development
- **Original:** https://www.mnd.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/view/mnds-27-may-2015-response-to-media-queries-on-high-court-judgement
- **Topics:** HDB & Public Housing, Commercial & Industrial

## Featured rationale

Requiring independent accountants as a grant condition could strengthen estate-fund governance and potentially reduce risks to maintenance financing and services for residents.

## AI summary

The High Court identified serious questions concerning AHPETC accounts and $25.9 million of related-party payments, alongside numerous breaches of town-council legislation and financial rules.

## Original article

MND notes that the Court has agreed with MND’s concerns about AHPETC. The Court said there were “grave and serious questions” that have been raised regarding the state of AHPETC’s accounts and the validity and propriety of payments previously made by AHPETC to related parties (amounting to $25.9 million), and that “there have also been numerous breaches of the provisions” of the Town Councils Act and Town Councils Financial Rules. The Court added that the TC’s conduct was the height of financial irresponsibility.

The Judge also stated that if AHPETC was a managing corporation subject to the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (BMSMA), he would have no doubt that AHPETC or its officers will be exposed to the “possibility of civil liability… or, in an extreme scenario, criminal liability”.

The Court added that it was a travesty for AHPETC to have ignored their duties and obligations.

And that the TC was to be blamed for not accepting MND’s offer to release the grant.

The Court said that HDB and residents could have brought the action, but not MND itself. The Court has also noted that MND can require the TC to appoint Independent Accountants (as a condition for release of grants), without having to get a court order. (See Annex for summary of findings and observations in judgement).

MND will study the Judgement carefully and consider what the next steps should be.

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: grok_cli

### 国家发展部2015年5月27日就高等法院判决的媒体询问所作回应

国家发展部注意到，法院认同国家发展部对AHPETC的关切。法院表示，就AHPETC账目状况，以及AHPETC过往向关联方所作付款（金额达2590万新元）的有效性与正当性，已出现“重大而严重的问题”，并指出“亦存在多项违反”《市镇理事会法令》及《市镇理事会财务规则》“条文”的情况。法院补充称，该市镇理事会的行为达到了财务上极度不负责任的程度。

法官亦表示，若AHPETC是受《建筑物维修与分层管理法令》（BMSMA）规管的管理法人，他毫不怀疑AHPETC或其人员将面临“民事责任的可能……或在极端情况下，刑事责任”。

法院补充称，AHPETC无视其职责与义务，实属荒谬。

并指该市镇理事会应对不接受国家发展部发放津贴的提议负责。

法院表示，建屋发展局（HDB）与居民本可提起诉讼，但国家发展部本身不能。法院亦指出，国家发展部可作为发放津贴的条件，要求该市镇理事会委任独立会计师，而无须取得法院命令。（判决中裁定与意见摘要见附件）。

国家发展部将仔细研究该判决，并考虑下一步应采取的行动。