Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard v Robinson & Co: Constructive Dismissal & Damages
Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard appealed against the High Court's decision to strike out his claim against Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd for constructive dismissal and breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The Court of Appeal, comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA, and Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, dismissed the appeal on 7 August 2014, holding that damages were limited to the contractual notice period, which had already been exceeded by payments made by the company. The claim was for constructive dismissal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding a claim for constructive dismissal and breach of mutual trust. The court dismissed the appeal, limiting damages to the contractual notice period.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Paul Tan, Choo Zheng Xi |
| Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Won | M K Eusuff Ali, Megan Chia, Lucinda Lim |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Paul Tan | Peter Low LLC |
| Choo Zheng Xi | Peter Low LLC |
| M K Eusuff Ali | Tan Rajah & Cheah |
| Megan Chia | Tan Rajah & Cheah |
| Lucinda Lim | Tan Rajah & Cheah |
4. Facts
- The appellant was employed by the respondent from 9 October 2006 until the end of August 2012.
- The appellant resigned from the company on 24 August 2012.
- The company paid the appellant four months’ salary in lieu of notice, exceeding the two months stipulated in the contract.
- The appellant commenced a suit seeking damages for constructive dismissal, claiming persecution and unreasonable bias.
- The company applied to strike out the suit, arguing the appellant had already received more than his contractual entitlement.
- The appellant argued he was entitled to damages exceeding the contractual notice period due to the breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
- The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, limiting damages to the contractual notice period.
5. Formal Citations
- Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard v Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 126 of 2013, [2014] SGCA 43
- Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard v Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd, , [2014] 1 SLR 1382
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant employed by the respondent | |
| Appellant resigned from the Company | |
| Appellant commenced Suit No 1036 of 2012 against the Company | |
| Company filed Summons No 3064 of 2013 to strike out the Suit | |
| Appellant filed an affidavit to oppose the Company’s striking-out application | |
| Summonses heard by an assistant registrar, who granted both applications | |
| Appellant filed Registrar’s Appeal No 286 of 2013 against the AR’s decision to strike out his claim | |
| The two appeals were heard together by a High Court judge, who dismissed both appeals | |
| Court dismissed the appeal and gave brief grounds | |
| Detailed reasons for the decision given |
7. Legal Issues
- Constructive Dismissal
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant's claim for damages beyond the amount of salary payable for his contractual notice period was legally unsustainable.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Breach of implied term of mutual trust and confidence
- Repudiation of employment contract
- Related Cases:
- [1998] AC 20
- Breach of Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
- Outcome: The court held that any breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, as pleaded in the present case, was relevant only to the issue of repudiation of the employment contract (ie, constructive dismissal), and that could not give rise to an entirely separate basis for assessing damages.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1998] AC 20
- Measure of Damages for Constructive Dismissal
- Outcome: The court held that the normal measure of damages in cases of wrongful dismissal is the amount which the employee would have received under the employment contract had the employer lawfully terminated the contract by giving the required notice or paying salary in lieu of notice, subject to mitigation.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Premature termination losses
- Continuing financial losses
- Related Cases:
- [1992] 3 SLR(R) 933
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages for Constructive Dismissal
- Damages for Breach of Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
9. Cause of Actions
- Constructive Dismissal
- Breach of Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Employment Dispute Resolution
11. Industries
- Retail
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA | House of Lords | Yes | [1998] AC 20 | England | Cited regarding the possibility of claiming for continuing financial loss beyond the contractual notice period if the company had breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, resulting in a loss of future employment prospects. |
| The “Bunga Melati 5” | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 546 | Singapore | Cited for the test applied to determine whether a party’s claim is plainly or obviously unsustainable such that it should be struck out under O 18 r 19(1)(b) of the Rules. |
| Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1978] QB 761 | England | Cited to explain the concept of constructive dismissal. |
| Eastwood and another v Magnox Electric plc | House of Lords | Yes | [2005] 1 AC 503 | England | Cited regarding the development of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in employment contracts. |
| Alexander Proudfoot Productivity Services Co S’pore Pte Ltd v Sim Hua Ngee Alvin and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1992] 3 SLR(R) 933 | Singapore | Cited for the normal measure of damages in cases of wrongful dismissal. |
| Teh Guek Ngor Engelin née Tan and others v Chia Ee Lin Evelyn and another | High Court | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR(R) 22 | Singapore | Cited for the normal measure of damages in cases of wrongful dismissal. |
| Gunton v Richmond-Upon-Thames London Borough Council | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1981] Ch 448 | England | Cited regarding damages should be assessed on the basis that the employer would have exercised any power it might have had to bring the employment contract to an end at the earliest date at which it could lawfully do so. |
| Semana Bachicha v Poon Shiu Man | Hong Kong Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] 2 HKLRD 833 | Hong Kong | Cited regarding the distinction between the damages recoverable for wrongful dismissal and the damages recoverable for an independent breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. |
| Johnson v Unisys Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [2003] 1 AC 518 | England | Cited regarding the 'Johnson exclusion' and that the implied term of mutual trust and confidence did not apply in wrongful dismissal cases. |
| Arul Chandran v Gartshore and others | High Court | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 436 | Singapore | Cited in relation to the breach of an implied but independently actionable term. |
| Eastwood and Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Trust | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 2 All ER 278 | England | Cited regarding the reaffirmation of the 'Johnson exclusion' in English law. |
| Shaw v State of New South Wales | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | (2012) 219 IR 87; [2012] NSWCA 102 | Australia | Cited as an instance where the courts were concerned with consequences other than premature termination arising from a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in an employment contract. |
| Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker | Federal Court of Australia | Yes | (2013) 214 FCR 450 | Australia | Cited as an instance where the courts were concerned with consequences other than premature termination arising from a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in an employment contract. |
| Wong Leong Wei Edward and another v Acclaim Insurance Brokers Pte Ltd and another suit | High Court | Yes | [2010] SGHC 352 | Singapore | Cited regarding the possibility of claiming damages beyond the contractual notice period if the defendant had wrongfully dismissed the plaintiff in a manner that was dishonest or illegitimate which amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. |
| Cheah Peng Hock v Luzhou Bio-Chem Technology Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 577 | Singapore | Cited as no authoritative view has been expressed on the applicability of the “Johnson exclusion” in Singapore. |
| Chan Miu Yin v Phillip Morris Singapore Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2011] SGHC 161 | Singapore | Cited as no authoritative view has been expressed on the applicability of the “Johnson exclusion” in Singapore. |
| Francis v Municipal Councillors of Kuala Lumpur | Privy Council | Yes | [1962] 1 WLR 1411 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that there cannot be specific performance of a contract of employment under the common law. |
| Lim Tow Peng and another v Singapore Bus Services Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1974–1976] SLR(R) 673 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there cannot be specific performance of a contract of employment under the common law. |
| Arokiasamy Joseph Clement Louis v Singapore Airlines Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2002] 2 SLR(R) 924 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there cannot be specific performance of a contract of employment under the common law. |
| Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) 112 | Singapore | Cited for the basic requirements to establish standing to seek declaratory relief. |
| Tan Eng Hong v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 476 | Singapore | Cited for the basic requirements to establish standing to seek declaratory relief. |
| Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard v Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] 1 SLR 1382 | Singapore | The decision from which this appeal arose. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Constructive dismissal
- Implied term of mutual trust and confidence
- Wrongful dismissal
- Premature termination losses
- Stigma damages
- Johnson exclusion
- Repudiatory breach
- Salary in lieu of notice
- Settlement agreement
15.2 Keywords
- constructive dismissal
- employment law
- contract law
- damages
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Employment Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Litigation
17. Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Employment Law
- Civil Procedure