Doctor charged under Bankruptcy Act after moving assets out of creditors’ reach

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox

Goh Seng Heng had moved millions of dollars in assets to his family members with the intent to defraud his creditors.

Goh Seng Heng had moved millions of dollars in assets to his family members with the intent to defraud his creditors.

PHOTO: ST FILE

Google Preferred Source badge

SINGAPORE – Aesthetics doctor Goh Seng Heng, who founded the PPP Laser Clinic chain and was declared a bankrupt in 2020, was handed 13 charges under the Bankruptcy Act on Dec 13.

Goh, 68, had moved millions of dollars in assets to his family members with the intent to defraud his creditors.

This included transferring his half-share in a Sentosa house to his wife for $5.25 million, buying a $5.8 million penthouse at the Seascape condominium on Sentosa in his son’s name and moving $1.87 million to the latter’s bank account.

These transactions were later declared void and of no effect.

On Dec 13, Goh told a district court that he was still thinking about whether to engage a lawyer for his case, which has been adjourned to Jan 17.

For most of his charges under the Bankruptcy Act, he can be jailed for up to two years and fined up to $10,000 if convicted of each charge.

A search with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority shows that he is a shareholder of three companies – Aesthetic Medical Partners, Dr Goh Seng Heng and Inchone.

Goh applied for bankruptcy on March 6, 2020, stating that he was unable to pay his debts. He was declared a bankrupt 13 days later, on March 19.

Court documents state that before his bankruptcy application, Goh allegedly contributed to his insolvency by gambling at the Marina Bay Sands casino from March 6, 2019, to March 5, 2020, and losing more than $5.1 million.

In 2019, he had lost a lawsuit filed by businesswoman Wang Xiaopu, who had invested $30.7 million in the PPP chain and demanded the return of her investment.

When he failed to repay the sum, she sued his family members, contending that he had placed his assets out of his creditors’ reach via various asset purchases and transfers.

Madam Wang, represented by Senior Counsel Jimmy Yim and Ms Grace Morgan from Drew & Napier, had also argued that Goh’s bankruptcy application was intended to delay, hinder and defraud his creditors.

On March 29, 2023, the High Court ruled that Goh had moved millions in assets to his family members with the intent to defraud his creditors.

Court documents relating to offences under the Bankruptcy Act state that among other things, Goh allegedly failed to indicate in his supplementary information to the Official Assignee (OA) that he had a beneficial interest in a unit at the Seascape condominium in Sentosa Cove, registered under his son, Dr Jeremy Goh.

The OA is a public servant who investigates the affairs of bankrupts and recovers their assets for distribution to creditors.

Justice Lee Seiu Kin also found that Goh Seng Heng had been the joint owner of the Cove Way house in Sentosa and was liable to refund his wife, Madam Koh Mui Lee, the sum of $5.25 million she had paid him.

In addition, Goh was said to have failed to indicate in the supplementary information to the OA that he had a beneficial interest in a unit at The Berth by the Cove condominium in Sentosa Cove, bought for $4.88 million in the name of his daughter, Ms Melissa Goh.

However, the High Court had earlier found that there was insufficient evidence that the unit was purchased with the intention to defraud creditors.

Justice Lee concluded that Ms Goh held the property on trust for her parents.

The High Court’s decision in March meant that the assets which Goh had placed beyond his creditors’ reach were vested with OA.

Justice Lee had earlier ordered Dr Jeremy Goh to pay over monies in the bank account to the OA within seven days, sell the Seascape unit within three months and pay 50 per cent of the proceeds to the OA.

He similarly ordered Ms Goh to sell the unit at The Berth within three months and pay 50 per cent of the proceeds to the OA.

See more on