Tan Woo Thian v PricewaterhouseCoopers: Negligence Claim over SBI Offshore Report

Tan Woo Thian appealed the High Court's decision to dismiss his negligence claim against PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte Ltd. The claim arose from a fact-finding review conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers regarding transactions involving SBI Offshore Limited, where Tan was a former CEO. Tan alleged that inaccurate statements in PricewaterhouseCoopers' report caused him reputational loss, diminution in share value, emotional trauma, and loss of influence. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that even if a duty of care existed and was breached, Tan failed to prove causation between the report and his alleged losses.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the republic of singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex-Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal dismissed in negligence claim against PricewaterhouseCoopers. The court found no causation between the report and the alleged losses.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Tan Woo ThianAppellant, PlaintiffIndividualAppeal dismissed with costsLost
PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte LtdRespondent, DefendantCorporationAppeal dismissedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sundaresh MenonChief JusticeYes
Andrew Phang Boon LeongJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudge of the Appellate DivisionNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Narayanan Vijya KumarVijay & Co
Chew XiangRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Kelvin PoonRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Ang Peng Koon PatrickRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Chow Jie YingRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Cheong Tian CiRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
TorstenRajah & Tann Singapore LLP

4. Facts

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers was engaged by SBI Offshore Limited to conduct a fact-finding review.
  2. The review concerned transactions related to SBI's acquisition and disposal of shares in Jiangyin Neptune Marine Appliance Co Ltd.
  3. Tan Woo Thian, as SBI's former CEO, was involved in these transactions.
  4. PricewaterhouseCoopers prepared a report, and an executive summary was circulated to SBI's Board and shareholders.
  5. A report was made to the Commercial Affairs Department based on PricewaterhouseCoopers' findings.
  6. Tan Woo Thian alleged that inaccurate statements in the executive summary caused him loss.
  7. The trial was bifurcated between liability and quantum.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Tan Woo Thian v PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 93 of 2020, [2021] SGCA 20
  2. Tan Woo Thian v PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte Ltd, , [2020] SGHC 171

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Suit No 267 of 2017 filed
Judgment issued in Tan Woo Thian v PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte Ltd [2020] SGHC 171
Civil Appeal No 93 of 2020 filed
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found that even assuming a duty of care existed and was breached, the appellant failed to prove causation of loss.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Breach of Duty of Care
      • Causation of Loss
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100
  2. Duty of Care
    • Outcome: The court did not make a definitive ruling on whether a duty of care existed in the circumstances, leaving it as an open question for future cases.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100
  3. Causation
    • Outcome: The court held that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that the respondent's alleged breach of duty caused the losses claimed.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Accounting
  • Offshore and Marine

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Tan Woo Thian v PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2020] SGHC 171SingaporeCited as the decision being appealed from, where the Judge dismissed the appellant’s claim for negligence.
Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology AgencyCourt of AppealYes[2007] 4 SLR(R) 100SingaporeCited for the applicable test for determining the existence of a duty of care.
Spring v Guardian Assurance PlcHouse of LordsYes[1995] 2 AC 296England and WalesCited to support the argument that the existence of alternative causes of action such as defamation need not preclude the finding of a duty of care.

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

  • Duty of care
  • Causation
  • Negligence
  • SBI Offshore Limited
  • Fact-finding review
  • Executive Summary
  • Commercial Affairs Department
  • Loss of business reputation
  • Diminution in share value
  • Loss of influence

15.2 Keywords

  • Negligence
  • Causation
  • Duty of Care
  • SBI Offshore
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers
  • Singapore Court of Appeal

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Negligence95
Duty of Care90
Causation80
Reputational Loss40
Diminution in Share Value30
Contract Law30
Corporate Litigation20
Costs20
Civil Procedure20

16. Subjects

  • Tort Law
  • Negligence
  • Commercial Law