Sports Connection v Deuter Sports: Exclusive Distributorship Termination Dispute
Sports Connection Pte Ltd sued Deuter Sports GmbH in the High Court of Singapore, alleging wrongful repudiation of an exclusive distributorship agreement, breach of contract, and unlawful conspiracy. Deuter Sports GmbH counterclaimed for damages, alleging breaches of the agreement and fiduciary duties. The court, presided over by Andrew Ang J, dismissed Sports Connection's claim, finding that Deuter Sports GmbH was entitled to terminate the agreement due to Sports Connection's breach of the non-competition clause. The court granted interlocutory judgment to Deuter Sports GmbH on its counterclaim, with damages to be assessed by the Registrar.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; interlocutory judgment granted to the defendant on the counterclaim with damages to be assessed by the Registrar.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Sports Connection sues Deuter Sports for wrongful termination of an exclusive distributorship agreement. The court dismissed the claim and allowed Deuter's counterclaim.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sports Connection Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Lost | |
| Deuter Sports GmbH | Defendant | Corporation | Counterclaim Allowed | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Ang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Sports Connection was the exclusive distributor of Deuter products in Singapore since 1992.
- A Letter of Agreement was signed in 2002, re-appointing Sports Connection as the exclusive distributor for three years.
- The Letter of Agreement contained a non-competition clause.
- Deuter terminated the Letter of Agreement in 2005, citing several reasons, including the sale of competing products.
- Sports Connection sued Deuter for wrongful repudiation of the Letter of Agreement.
- The US$1m purchase target was not met in 2004.
- Sports Connection refused to stop selling competing products.
5. Formal Citations
- Sports Connection Pte Ltd v Deuter Sports GMBH, Suit 280/2005, [2008] SGHC 109
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Sports Connection became the exclusive distributor of Deuter products in Singapore. | |
| Letter of Agreement re-appointing Sports Connection as exclusive distributor signed. | |
| Letter of Agreement commenced for a three-year period. | |
| Deuter tried to invoke the non-competition clause. | |
| Amendment to the Letter of Agreement signed. | |
| Deuter terminated the Letter of Agreement. | |
| Sports Connection refused to cease selling competing products. | |
| Letter of Agreement was terminated. | |
| Suit commenced by the plaintiff. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Wrongful Repudiation of Contract
- Outcome: The court held that the defendant was entitled to terminate the Letter of Agreement due to the plaintiff's breach of the non-competition clause.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Breach of non-competition clause
- Excessive discounting
- Essential change in business
- Related Cases:
- [2008] SGHC 77
- [1971] 1 WLR 361
- [2006] 3 SLR 640
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Wrongful Repudiation
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Retail
- Sporting Goods
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singapore Tourism Board v Children’s Media Limited | High Court | Yes | [2008] SGHC 77 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of repudiation of contract, stating that the threatened breach must deprive the injured party of a substantial part of the benefit to which he is entitled under the contract. |
| Decro-Wall International SA v Practitioners in Marketing Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1971] 1 WLR 361 | N/A | Cited for the principle that to constitute repudiation, the threatened breach must deprive the injured party of a substantial part of the benefit to which he is entitled under the contract. |
| Highness Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd v Sigma Cable Co (Pte) Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2006] 3 SLR 640 | Singapore | Cited for the test of whether the consequences of the breach are such that it will be unfair to the injured party to hold it to the contract and leave it to its remedy in damages as and when a breach occurred. |
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
- Exclusive distributorship
- Non-competition clause
- Wrongful repudiation
- Letter of Agreement
- US$1m purchase target
- Competing products
- Market penetration
- High quality brand positioning
15.2 Keywords
- Distributorship
- Contract
- Termination
- Singapore
- Commercial
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Breach of Contract | 95 |
| Contract Law | 90 |
| Agency and Distributorships | 85 |
| Commercial Disputes | 80 |
| Agency Law | 70 |
16. Subjects
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law
- Distributorship Agreements