Singapore River Cruises v Phun Teow Kie: Breach of Fiduciary Duty in Securing Clarke Quay Contract
Singapore River Cruises & Leisure Pte Ltd sued Phun Teow Kie and another in the High Court of Singapore, alleging breaches of contractual or fiduciary duties by Phun in securing a contract from Clarke Quay Pte Ltd for the second defendants, which the plaintiffs claimed he should have secured for them. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims against both defendants, finding that Phun did not breach any contractual or fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs appealed the decision.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore River Cruises sued Phun Teow Kie for breach of fiduciary duty for securing a contract from Clarke Quay. The court dismissed the claim, finding no breach.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singapore River Cruises & Leisure Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Lost | Toh Kok Seng, Raphael Lee |
| Phun Teow Kie | Defendant | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Won | Jeffrey Sim |
| Another | Defendant | Other | Claim Dismissed | Won | Jeffrey Sim |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lee Seiu Kin | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Toh Kok Seng | Lee & Lee |
| Raphael Lee | Lee & Lee |
| Jeffrey Sim | Chui Sim Goh & Lim |
4. Facts
- Phun was employed by Singapore River Cruises as a Marketing Manager.
- Phun secured a contract from Clarke Quay for the second defendants.
- Png and Phun had a falling out due to accusations of misappropriation.
- Phun spent most of his time with his own companies.
- There was no written contract of employment for Phun.
- Png was absent at Phun's engagement ceremony.
5. Formal Citations
- Singapore River Cruises & Leisure Pte Ltd v Phun Teow Kie and Another, Suit 279/1998, [2000] SGHC 2
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Lian Hup Choon Marine Private Limited incorporated. | |
| Miss Universe Pageant held in Singapore. | |
| Miss Universe Pageant held in Singapore. | |
| STPB awarded the plaintiffs a contract to operate boating activities. | |
| Phun joined the plaintiffs as an employee. | |
| Plaintiffs' name changed to Singapore River Cruises & Leisure Pte Ltd. | |
| Png attended a meeting with STPB. | |
| Phun's employment terminated. | |
| Plaintiffs filed the writ in this action. | |
| Plaintiffs’ claims against both defendants dismissed with costs. | |
| Plaintiffs appealed against the decision. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Outcome: The court found that Phun did not breach any contractual or fiduciary duty as an employee when he secured the contract from CQ for the second defendants.
- Category: Substantive
- Employee's duties
- Outcome: The court determined that Phun's role in the company was minimal and that he did not owe the duties alleged by the plaintiffs.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Account of Profits
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Tourism
- Marine
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robb v Green | Queen's Bench | Yes | [1895] 2 QB 315 | England and Wales | Cited regarding employee duties, but found not helpful in establishing the duties alleged in this case because it involves existing customers and not new business opportunities. |
| Wessex Dairies Ltd v Smith | King's Bench | Yes | [1935] 2 KB 80 | England and Wales | Cited regarding employee duties, but found not helpful in establishing the duties alleged in this case because it involves existing customers and not new business opportunities. |
| Industrial Development Consultants Ltd v Cooley | N/A | Yes | [1972] 2 All ER 162 | N/A | Cited regarding employee duties, but distinguished because the defendant was a managing director, not a mere employee. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Fiduciary Duty
- Clarke Quay
- Singapore River Cruises
- Family Company
- Misappropriation
15.2 Keywords
- Fiduciary Duty
- Employment Law
- Singapore River Cruises
- Clarke Quay
- Breach of Contract
16. Subjects
- Employment Law
- Fiduciary Duty
- Contract Law
17. Areas of Law
- Employment Law
- Equity
- Fiduciary relationships