"I am a BLOGGER NOT an expert. This is a BLOG not a 'go-to' website for official information. I represent no one's view save my own. I have neither legal nor financial training, nor do I have anything to do with the real estate industry. My understanding of the Collective Sale Process is from a layman's position only. My calculations, computations and tables are homespun and may contain errors. Please note that nothing in this blog constitutes any legal or financial advice to anyone reading it. You should refer to your lawyer, CSC or financial adviser for expert advice before making any decision. This disclaimer is applicable to every post and comment on the blog. Read at your own risk."
Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
There is one thing worse than an Enbloc ----- and that is an Enbloc done badly. Since the majority have the necessary mandate to sell, then they owe it to all SPs to make a success of it. Minority SPs can only watch and wait, if they sell then lets pray it's at a price we can move on with, if they don't sell, then we are happy to stay for a few more years.


Sad to say, Gillman Heights minority lost today.

The STB threw out all their objections and granted the order of sale.
But, it's not over yet.

They have 28 days in which to make an appeal to the
High Court on a point of law. After that, a high court hearing
would be scheduled about 3 months down the line.
Today Weekend 22 Dec 2007 - 53 minority to appeal to High court. They are not going down without a fight!
STB nod for Gillman Heights en bloc sale
Business Times 22 Dec 2007


  1. Sad indeed.
    Do you have the details why it was not rejected?

  2. They didn't read out the full decision, only excerpts. He mainly quoted from Horizon Towers and Phoenix Court High Court rulings (as I predicted) that allowed the Board to reject the objections on the grounds that a strict construction of the rules is not what Parliament would have intended.
    On the valuation: they rejected one minority valuer as being unreliable and 'shifty'( I think that's the word he used).
    On the CSC/TOP: a new building cannot rejuvenate an estate back to year zero.
    On good faith: just that there was no merit in the minority's arguements etc.
    The room was crowded - and silent after the judgment. They are regrouping at a meeting tonight to plan their next step. They were despondent but not beaten.
    The TOP/CSC is a point of law - and is appealable, or so I am told.

  3. The age is determined according to the "LATEST" TOP or CSC according to the LAW. This means that there can be other developments in an estate, and the latest one will be used to determined. Thus the reason that "a new building cannot rejuvenate an estate back to zero" is not acceptable.
    We should still contest this! If the law can be interpreted as one chooses, then why is there a new amendment to this rule to make it clearer?
    The new change to this LAW, is to make it clear that if a TOP or CSC is not issued, then the date of completion of development shall be used.

  4. all the 99 lesaehold properties, shall just build one small club hse and all become year zero