Wang Weidong v SPM Global Services: Inducing Breach of Contract & Amendment of Pleadings

In Wang Weidong v SPM Global Services Pte Ltd and Mark Aldie Stiffler, the High Court of Singapore addressed the Plaintiff's application to amend his Statement of Claim to include a new cause of action against the 2nd Defendant, Mark Aldie Stiffler, for inducing the 1st Defendant, SPM Global Services Pte Ltd, to breach a tenancy agreement. The court disallowed the amendment, finding that it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action, but allowed the remaining amendments. The court also considered and rejected the argument that the amendment was an abuse of process.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiff's application to amend the Statement of Claim was disallowed in part and allowed in part.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Plaintiff's application to amend Statement of Claim to add a cause of action for inducing breach of contract was disallowed for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Wang WeidongPlaintiff, ApplicantIndividualApplication disallowed in part and allowed in partPartial
SPM Global Services Pte LtdDefendant, RespondentCorporationNo specific outcomeNeutral
Mark Aldie StifflerDefendant, RespondentIndividualApplication partially successfulPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Justin YeoAssistant RegistrarYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Wong Teck MingRHTLaw Taylor Wessing LLP
Koh JunxiangCLASIS LLC
Kam Kai QiCLASIS LLC

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff is the registered owner of a property.
  2. 1st Defendant is a company in the business of sales performance management software and services.
  3. 2nd Defendant was the Managing Director and sole shareholder of the 1st Defendant.
  4. Plaintiff and 1st Defendant entered into a Tenancy Agreement.
  5. 1st Defendant failed to pay rent.
  6. 1st Defendant underwent voluntary winding up on 5 June 2017.
  7. Plaintiff sought to amend the Statement of Claim to add a cause of action against the 2nd Defendant for inducing breach of contract.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Wang Weidong v SPM Global Services Pte Ltd and another, Suit No 698 of 2016 (Summons No 1647 of 2018), [2018] SGHCR 6

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Tenancy Agreement signed
First instance of failure to pay rent
1st Defendant disavowed the Tenancy Agreement
Plaintiff commenced suit
Plaintiff repossessed the Premises
Defendants re-entered the Premises
Plaintiff repossessed the Premises again
High Court ordered deactivation of access cards
1st Defendant underwent voluntary winding up
Plaintiff amended Statement of Claim
Earlier Amendment Application heard and withdrawn
Plaintiff brought present application to amend Statement of Claim
Judgment reserved
Judgment

7. Legal Issues

  1. Amendment of Pleadings
    • Outcome: The court disallowed the amendment related to the new cause of action, finding that it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Disclosure of reasonable cause of action
      • Abuse of process
      • Incremental litigation
    • Related Cases:
      • [1990] 1 SLR(R) 337
  2. Inducement of Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that the Plaintiff's pleadings were insufficient to establish a reasonable cause of action for inducement of breach of contract against the 2nd Defendant.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2000] 2 SLR(R) 407
      • [2018] SGCA 17
      • [1920] 2 KB 497
      • [2004] 4 SLR 801
  3. Abuse of Process
    • Outcome: The court found that the Contested Amendment does not amount to an abuse of process.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Incremental litigation
      • Second bite at the cherry
    • Related Cases:
      • [2004] 2 SLR(R) 173
      • [2017] SGHC 60

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Amendment of Statement of Claim

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Inducement of Breach of Contract
  • Trespass

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin v Lee Kuan YewHigh CourtYes[1990] 1 SLR(R) 337SingaporeCited for the principle that the principles to be applied in a contested application for leave to amend pleadings are akin to those which apply if the application had been to strike out the amended pleadings.
Tribune Investment Trust Inc v Soosan Trading Co LtdCourt of AppealYes[2000] 2 SLR(R) 407SingaporeCited for the two-fold criteria to establish a claim in tort for inducement of breach of contract.
PT Sandipala Arthaputra v STMicroelectronics Asia Pacific Pte Ltd and othersCourt of AppealYes[2018] SGCA 17SingaporeCited for the principle that a director is exempt from personal tortious liability in respect of contractual breaches by his company if he had not acted in breach of any fiduciary or legal duties owed to their company.
Said v ButtKing's Bench DivisionYes[1920] 2 KB 497England and WalesAffirmed in PT Sandipala Arthaputra for the principle that a director is exempt from personal tortious liability in respect of contractual breaches by his company if he had not acted in breach of any fiduciary or legal duties owed to their company.
Chong Hon Kuan Ivan v Levy Maurice and othersHigh CourtYes[2004] 4 SLR 801SingaporeCited for guidance on the sufficiency of pleadings in the specific context of pleading that a director had acted outside the scope of his office.
Wright Norman and another v Overseas-Chinese Banking Corp LtdHigh CourtYes[1993] 3 SLR(R) 640SingaporeCited for the principle that it would be in the interests of justice to have all facts, details and causes of action pleaded and tried at the trial.
Asia Business Forum Pte Ltd v Long Ai SinCourt of AppealYes[2004] 2 SLR(R) 173SingaporeCited for the principle that amendments should not be allowed if they amount to seeking a 'second bite at the cherry'.
Antariksa Logistics Pte Ltd and others v Nurdian Cuaca and othersHigh CourtYes[2017] SGHC 60SingaporeCited for the principle that it is an abuse of process to litigate incrementally, unless the decision to do so is reasonable and bona fide.
Goh Nellie v Goh Lian Teck and othersHigh CourtYes[2007] 1 SLR(R) 453SingaporeCited for the principle that an amendment should not be allowed if it is based on a claim that the Plaintiff, exercising reasonable diligence, might have brought forward earlier.
Review Publishing Co Ltd and another v Lee Hsien Loong and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2010] 1 SLR 52SingaporeCited for the principle that delay per se did not amount to prejudice or injustice to the 2nd Defendant.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 20 r 5(5) of the Rules of Court
O 20 r 12 of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, Rev Ed 2014)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Tenancy Agreement
  • Inducement of Breach of Contract
  • Statement of Claim
  • Amendment of Pleadings
  • Reasonable Cause of Action
  • Abuse of Process
  • Incremental Litigation
  • Voluntary Winding Up
  • Director's Liability

15.2 Keywords

  • Amendment of Pleadings
  • Inducing Breach of Contract
  • Director's Liability
  • Singapore High Court
  • Civil Procedure
  • Contract Law
  • Tort Law

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Inducement of Breach of Contract85
Civil Practice75
Abuse of Process65
Contract Law60
Landlord and Tenant Law50
Company Law40
Property Law30
Estoppel20

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Contract Law
  • Tort Law
  • Amendment of Pleadings
  • Director's Liability