Adinop Co Ltd v Rovithai Ltd: Breach of Confidence & Confidentiality Agreement in Distributor Termination

Adinop Co Ltd, a Thai company, sued Rovithai Limited and DSM Singapore Industrial Pte Ltd in the Court of Appeal of Singapore, alleging misuse of confidential customer information following the termination of their distributorship agreement. Adinop claimed breach of a Confidentiality Agreement and equitable obligations of confidentiality. The court, led by Belinda Ang Saw Ean J, allowed the appeal in part, finding that Rovithai breached both the Confidentiality Agreement and its equitable duty of confidence by using Adinop's customer lists to notify customers of the change in distributorship, but dismissed the claim against DSM Singapore.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed in Part

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Thai distributor Adinop sued Rovithai and DSM Singapore for misusing confidential customer information after termination of their agreement. The court allowed the appeal in part, finding a breach of contract and equitable duty.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Steven ChongJudge of AppealNo
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes
Quentin LohJudgeNo

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Adinop was Rovithai's distributor in Thailand for standard DSM products from the 1990s until mid-2014.
  2. Adinop provided Rovithai with a Key Customers List and an Ongoing Projects List containing customer information.
  3. Rovithai terminated the distributorship agreement with Adinop on 10 June 2014.
  4. Rovithai sent a notice to Adinop's customers on 1 July 2014, informing them of the change in distributor.
  5. The Confidentiality Agreement between Adinop and Rovithai was in effect from 1 June 2013 to 30 June 2014.
  6. Five of Adinop's customers cancelled orders after receiving the notice from Rovithai.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Adinop Co Ltd v Rovithai Ltd and another, Civil Appeal No 108 of 2018, [2019] SGCA 67

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Business relationship between Adinop and Rovithai began
Distributorship arrangement formalized in writing
Confidentiality Agreement commenced
Confidentiality Agreement signed
Ongoing Projects List provided to Rovithai
Key Customers List provided to Rovithai
Rovithai issued notice of termination to Adinop
Confidentiality Agreement expired
Notification sent to Adinop’s customers
Civil Appeal No 108 of 2018 filed
Judgment reserved
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Confidentiality Agreement
    • Outcome: The court found that Rovithai breached the Confidentiality Agreement by using Adinop's customer information to notify customers of the change in distributorship.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Misuse of confidential information
      • Unauthorised use of confidential information
  2. Breach of Equitable Duty of Confidence
    • Outcome: The court found that Rovithai breached its equitable duty of confidence by using Adinop's customer information to notify customers of the change in distributorship.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Unauthorised use of confidential information
      • Detriment to disclosing party

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Assessment of Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Breach of Confidence

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Contract Disputes

11. Industries

  • Food and Beverage
  • Nutrition
  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Cosmetics

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Adinop Co Ltd v Rovithai Limited and DSM Singapore Industrial Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2018] SGHC 129SingaporeThe High Court's decision that was appealed in this case.
Coco v A N Clark (Engineering) LtdN/AYes[1968] FSR 415N/ACited for the legal position to establish a breach of confidentiality in the absence of a contractual relationship.
PH Hydraulics & Engineering Pte Ltd v Intrepid Offshore Constructions Pte LtdN/AYes[2012] 4 SLR 36SingaporeFollowed Coco v Clark to establish a breach of confidentiality in the absence of a contractual relationship.
Duncan Edward Vercoe and others v Rutland Fund Management Ltd and othersN/AYes[2010] EWHC (Ch)N/ACited to show that where there is a stipulated contractual duty of confidence, the court will not, ordinarily, impose additional or more extensive obligation of confidentiality in equity.
CP Partners (UK) LLP v Barclays Bank Plc and anotherN/AYes[2014] EWHC 3049N/ACited to show that there are occasions when equity may step in to impose a duty of confidence, where, for instance, “the contract does not necessarily assuage conscience, and equity may yet give force to conscience”
Invenpro(M) Sdn Bhd v JCS Automation Pte Ltd and anotherHigh CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 1045SingaporeCited for the objective test for determining whether good faith and conscience supports the imposition of a duty of confidence.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Confidential Information
  • Distributorship Arrangement
  • Key Customers List
  • Ongoing Projects List
  • Proprietary Information
  • Termination Notice
  • Customer Information

15.2 Keywords

  • breach of confidence
  • confidentiality agreement
  • distributorship
  • customer list
  • termination
  • Adinop
  • Rovithai
  • DSM Singapore

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Confidentiality
  • Distributorship
  • Commercial Law