In brief
In a verdict handed by the Singapore High Court, Chander Agarwal's claim to recover 369,000 dollars for gifts given to former partner Felicia Lee was dismissed. The judge found no evidence the expenditures were loans, deeming them acts of generosity. The case underscores the fine line between paid gifts and alleged advances in romantic relationships, while also citing unrelated lawsuits involving other high‑profile cases in Singapore.
Court Rejects $369k Claim Over Lavish Gifts to Ex‑Girlfriend
A Singaporean logistics chief, Chander Agarwal, sought to recover nearly S$468,000 – $369,200 – from former flight‑attendant partner Felicia Lee after a two‑year romance that ended on a sour note. The High Court ruled that the money was spent as gifts rather than as interest‑free loans.
Agarwal – who is CEO of a Singapore logistics company – claimed Lee had requested several “interest‑free loans”: S$206,000 in credit‑card charges, S$129,000 for overseas trips, S$17,000 to hire a feng‑shui master for her apartment and S$20,000 for her life‑insurance premiums. Lee countered that she accepted each expense as a gift out of love.
The judge found no supporting documentation to show Lee accepted the sums, and highlighted that Agarwal had a pattern of showering Lee with expensive gifts even before they became romantically involved. “The evidence makes clear that the claimant was a man smitten by the defendant and showered her with expensive gifts,” the judge said.
The court noted Agarwal was “clearly a man of ample means” while Lee “was not in that league.” It concluded that the claim was untenable and dismissed it.
The ruling follows a wave of high‑profile legal dramas in Singapore, including earlier cases where men filed multi‑million‑dollar suits against women who declined their advances. Those suits have largely been struck down by courts because of lack of evidence and the complex nature of emotional claims.
Image source: Getty Images
