Lin Jianwei v Tung Yu-Lien Margaret: Minority Shareholder Oppression and Taxation of Legal Fees

In a dispute between Lin Jianwei and Tung Yu-Lien Margaret, the two shareholders and directors of Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore addressed the issue of reimbursement of legal fees. Lin Jianwei, the majority shareholder, sought taxation of the fees paid by Tung Yu-Lien Margaret on behalf of the company. The court dismissed Lin Jianwei's application, finding that he did not act in good faith and that no special circumstances warranted taxation. The court allowed Tung Yu-Lien Margaret's application for reimbursement of the legal fees. The judgment was delivered by Justice Tan Siong Thye on 27 July 2020.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Originating Summons No 320 of 2020 dismissed; Summons No 1281 of 2020 allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex tempore judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Shareholder dispute over Raffles Town Club's legal fees. Court dismisses application for taxation, finding no good faith or special circumstances.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tan Siong ThyeJudgeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Lin Jianwei and Tung Yu-Lien Margaret are the only shareholders and directors of Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd.
  2. Lin Jianwei holds 60% of the shares, while Tung Yu-Lien Margaret holds 40%.
  3. Lin Jianwei is the executive chairman of Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd.
  4. Tung Yu-Lien Margaret paid solicitors' fees on behalf of Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd.
  5. Lin Jianwei refused to authorize reimbursement of the fees, claiming they were unreasonable and excessive.
  6. Lin Jianwei commenced OS 1446 and added the second defendant as a party to OS 1446 although the disputes are between him and the first defendant.
  7. The Consent Order states that the second defendant is to pay the costs of the solicitors in safeguarding the interests of the second defendant in OS 1446.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Lin Jianwei v Tung Yu-Lien Margaret and another and another matter, , [2020] SGHC 158

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Originating Summons No 1446 of 2018 filed
Consent Order made
Nair & Co LLC issued invoice
Lin Jianwei filed 1st affidavit in OS 320/2020
Tung Yu-Lien Margaret filed 9th affidavit in OS 1446/2018
Originating Summons No 320 of 2020 filed
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Oppression of Minority Shareholders
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff's application did not meet the requirements under s 216A(3)(b) of the Companies Act.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2013] 2 SLR 340
  2. Taxation of Solicitor's Bill of Costs
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff had not shown special circumstances warranting an order for taxation under s 122 of the Legal Profession Act.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] SGHC 253
      • [2010] 4 SLR 590
      • [2015] 5 SLR 722
      • [2009] 3 SLR(R) 206
  3. Good Faith in Statutory Derivative Action
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff was not acting in good faith in his application for taxation of the Fees.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2013] 2 SLR 340

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Taxation of Legal Fees

9. Cause of Actions

  • Statutory Derivative Action

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Shareholder Disputes

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ang Thiam Swee v Low Hian ChorCourt of AppealYes[2013] 2 SLR 340SingaporeCited for the principle that the applicant in a statutory derivative action must demonstrate that he is genuinely aggrieved and that his collateral purpose is sufficiently consistent with the purpose of doing justice to a company.
JWR Pte Ltd v Syn Kok Kay (trading as Patrick Chin Syn & Co)High CourtYes[2019] SGHC 253SingaporeCited for the principles regarding special circumstances warranting taxation of a solicitor's bill of costs after 12 months or after payment.
Sports Connection Pte Ltd v Asia Law Corp and anotherHigh CourtYes[2010] 4 SLR 590SingaporeCited for the principle that an order for taxation will only be made if the applicant is able to prove the existence of special circumstances.
Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd v ThangaveluHigh CourtYes[2015] 5 SLR 722SingaporeCited for examples of circumstances which have been found to be sufficiently special to justify taxation of a solicitor’s bill when one or both of the disqualifying events under s 122 have been triggered.
Ho Cheng Lay v Low Yong SenHigh CourtYes[2009] 3 SLR(R) 206SingaporeCited for examples of circumstances which have been found to be sufficiently special to justify taxation of a solicitor’s bill when one or both of the disqualifying events under s 122 have been triggered.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 216ASingapore
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) s 122Singapore
Companies Act s 157Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Solicitors' Fees
  • Taxation
  • Good Faith
  • Special Circumstances
  • Consent Order
  • Minority Shareholder
  • Statutory Derivative Action

15.2 Keywords

  • shareholder dispute
  • legal fees
  • taxation
  • good faith
  • special circumstances
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Company Law
  • Legal Profession
  • Civil Procedure