Ascorp Technology v Chew Youn Chong: Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Corporate Opportunity
In a suit before the High Court of Singapore, Ascorp Technology Pte Ltd, acting through its director Patrick Joseph Ryan, sued Chew Youn Chong and Adtronic Technologies Pte Ltd for breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of corporate opportunities. Chew Youn Chong counterclaimed against Ascorp for unpaid salary and profit shares and against Patrick Joseph Ryan for indemnity. The court found Chew Youn Chong liable for breaching his fiduciary duties by placing himself in a position of conflict of interest and granted Ascorp an account of sales and profits earned by Adtronic. The court allowed Chew Youn Chong's counterclaim against Ascorp for unpaid profit shares but dismissed his claim for salary in lieu of notice and his claim against Patrick Joseph Ryan.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff in part; Counterclaim allowed in part.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case involving Ascorp Technology's claim against Chew Youn Chong for breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of corporate opportunities.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ascorp Technology Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff in part | Partial | Godwin Gilbert Campos |
Chew Youn Chong | Defendant | Individual | Counterclaim allowed in part | Partial | Andrew J Hanam |
Adtronic Technologies Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | Andrew J Hanam |
Ryan Patrick Joseph | Third Party | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Dismissed | Godwin Gilbert Campos |
3. Judges
Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
---|---|---|
Chan Seng Onn | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
Counsel Name | Organization |
---|---|
Godwin Gilbert Campos | Godwin Campos LLC |
Andrew J Hanam | Andrew LLC |
4. Facts
- CYC and PJR entered into a Shareholders Agreement on 8 April 2003.
- CYC was appointed Managing Director of Ascorp.
- Infineon was Ascorp’s main customer.
- CYC incorporated Adtronic Technologies Pte Ltd on 28 November 2005.
- CYC was removed as Managing Director of Ascorp on 13 February 2006.
- Adtronic sent quotations to STM between 26 and 28 February 2006 to supply items with similar functions as the HQ64L cartridge.
- CYC signed multiple cheques to himself, each not exceeding $5,000.
5. Formal Citations
- Ascorp Technology Pte Ltd v Chew Youn Chong and another (Ryan Patrick Joseph, third party), Suit No 699 of 2006, [2011] SGHC 118
6. Timeline
Date | Event |
---|---|
Shareholders Agreement entered into between PJR and CYC | |
Infineon forecasted to Ascorp that it would order at least 2 sets of MQ64L cartridges per month for 2005 | |
Accounts and Business Review Meeting held | |
Infineon revised its forecast to two sets a week | |
CYC entered into a Consignment Stock Agreement with Infineon on behalf of Ascorp | |
CYC exercised purchase options | |
Ascorp had sold Infineon 19 sets of MQ64L cartridges | |
CYC exercised purchase options | |
PJR emailed CYC asking to be advised of the monthly net profit from January to June 2005 | |
CYC and PJR met so that the latter could countersign cheques for CYC’s allowance for April to June 2005 | |
Consignment Stock Agreement renewed | |
Meeting arranged between CYC and PJR at Raffles Town Club | |
CYC emailed PJR suggesting a “share purchase option or winding up [Ascorp]” | |
CYC incorporated the second defendant, Adtronic Technologies Pte Ltd | |
CYC emailed Ricky Peng regarding the split pins problem | |
PJR responded to the email exchanges to encourage Ricky Peng not to give up on the project | |
CYC's solicitors informed PJR and NSL that the most equitable solution is to wind up Ascorp | |
Board meeting held | |
All of Ascorp’s employees tendered their resignation | |
PJR sent out a notice calling for a Board meeting | |
Board meeting held; CYC removed as the Managing Director of Ascorp | |
Infineon sent Ascorp an email requesting MQ64L cartridges to be delivered | |
CYC and PJR met with Infineon | |
Ricky Peng refused to continue supplying its goods and services to Ascorp | |
Ascorp delivered only one MQ64L cartridge | |
Ascorp received a letter from Infineon stating that Ascorp was in breach of the Consignment Stock Agreement | |
Meeting between Infineon and PJR | |
Adtronic sent quotations to STM | |
Adtronic sent quotations to STM | |
CYC resigned as director of Ascorp | |
PJR met with a Mr Tay of STM | |
Ascorp brought the present action against CYC and Adtronic | |
Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Outcome: The court found that CYC had breached his fiduciary duties to act honestly and in the best interest of Ascorp by placing himself in a position of conflict of interest.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Conflict of interest
- Misappropriation of corporate opportunity
- Failure to act in the best interest of the company
- Breach of duty of honesty
- Related Cases:
- [2010] 3 SLR 813
- Enforcement of Shareholders Agreement
- Outcome: The court found that Ascorp was precluded from enforcing the terms of the Shareholders Agreement through the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act as that has been expressly excluded by clause 17 of the Shareholders Agreement.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Account of sales and profits
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Technology
12. Cited Cases
Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Swiss Butchery Pte Ltd v Huber Ernst | High Court | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 813 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a director cannot exploit a maturing business opportunity of the company for his own personal purposes and profit. |
ECRC Land Pte Ltd v Wing On Ho Christopher | High Court | Yes | [2004] 1 SLR(R) 105 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court should not substitute its own judgment for that of the directors in reviewing the directors’ exercise of discretion. |
Vita Health Laboratories Pte Ltd v Pang Seng Meng | High Court | Yes | [2004] 4 SLR(R) 162 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court should not substitute its own judgment for that of the directors in reviewing the directors’ exercise of discretion. |
13. Applicable Rules
Rule Name |
---|
No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
---|---|
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act (Cap 53B, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Fiduciary duty
- Conflict of interest
- Corporate opportunity
- Shareholders Agreement
- Managing Director
- MQ64L cartridges
- HQ64L cartridges
- Consignment Stock Agreement
15.2 Keywords
- fiduciary duty
- conflict of interest
- corporate opportunity
- Ascorp
- Chew Youn Chong
- Adtronic
- Singapore
- High Court
16. Subjects
- Company Law
- Fiduciary Duties
- Commercial Litigation
17. Areas of Law
- Company Law
- Contract Law
- Fiduciary Duty
- Corporate Opportunity