Dong Wei v Shell Eastern Trading: Breach of Contract, Negligence, Conspiracy, Malicious Falsehood

In *Dong Wei v Shell Eastern Trading (Pte) Ltd and another*, the Singapore High Court dismissed the plaintiff, Dong Wei's claims against his former employer, Shell Eastern Trading (Pte) Ltd, and his former manager, Lim Ming Way, for breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, conspiracy, negligence, and malicious falsehood. The plaintiff's claims arose from events following an incident with Vitol Asia Pte Ltd, which led to the termination of his employment. The court found that the plaintiff's claims were unsupported by sufficient evidence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

The plaintiff's claims against both the first and second defendants were dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court judgment on claims of breach of contract, negligence, conspiracy, and malicious falsehood against Shell Eastern Trading.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Dong WeiPlaintiffIndividualClaim DismissedLost
Shell Eastern Trading (Pte) LtdDefendantCorporationJudgment for DefendantWon
Lim Ming WayDefendantIndividualJudgment for DefendantWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Aedit AbdullahJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Choo Zheng XiPeter Low & Choo LLC
Wong Thai YongPeter Low & Choo LLC
Goh Seow HuiBird & Bird ATMD LLP
David Marc Lee YaoweiBird & Bird ATMD LLP

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff was employed as a Trading Operator by the first defendant on 28 July 2006.
  2. Plaintiff was promoted to Senior Freight Trader in or around 2012 to 2013.
  3. An incident occurred between the plaintiff and Vitol on 29 September 2017.
  4. The first defendant's Business Integrity Department commenced an investigation against the plaintiff on 20 October 2017.
  5. The plaintiff was suspended from work following an interview on 23 October 2017.
  6. The investigation report released on 21 November 2017 was inconclusive.
  7. The plaintiff's employment was terminated on 10 January 2018.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Dong Wei v Shell Eastern Trading (Pte) Ltd and another, Suit No 373 of 2018, [2021] SGHC 123

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Plaintiff employed by first defendant
Plaintiff promoted to Senior Freight Trader
Plaintiff promoted to Senior Freight Trader
Incident between plaintiff and Vitol
Second defendant met with Mr. Jones
Second defendant sent email to Mr. Stavros Kokkinis
First defendant's Business Integrity Department commenced investigation against the plaintiff
Plaintiff interviewed by Ms. Sumitra
BID released its investigation report
Platts reached out to the first defendant
Platts published an online article
Plaintiff's employment terminated
Agreed Bundle of Documents dated
Dong Wei’s Affidavit of Evidence-In-Chief dated
Lim Ming Wei’s Affidavit of Evidence-In-Chief dated
Stavros Kokkinis’ Affidavit of Evidence-In-Chief dated
Plaintiff’s Bundle of Documents dated
S&P Global Asian Holdings Pte Ltd’s Answer to Interrogatories dated
NOE dated
NOE dated
Reply (Amendment No. 4) dated
Ms Stine Martinussen’s Affidavit of Evidence-In-Chief dated
NOE dated
Plaintiff’s Reply Submissions dated
Plaintiff’s Closing Submissions dated
Defendants’ Closing Submissions dated
Defendants’ Reply Submissions dated
Trial began
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
    • Outcome: The court held that there was no breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2013] 2 SLR 577
      • [1998] AC 20
  2. Tort of Conspiracy
    • Outcome: The court held that the claim for conspiracy was not made out on the evidence.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Tort of Negligence
    • Outcome: The court held that the claim for negligence was not made out.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Tort of Malicious Falsehood
    • Outcome: The court held that the tort of malicious falsehood was not established against the second defendant.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Declaratory Relief

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Conspiracy
  • Negligence
  • Malicious Falsehood
  • Inducing Breach of Contract
  • Vicarious Liability

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Employment Litigation

11. Industries

  • Oil and Gas
  • Shipping

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Cheah Peng Hock v Luzhou Bio-Chem Technology LtdHigh CourtYes[2013] 2 SLR 577SingaporeCited for the principle that an implied term of mutual trust and confidence is implied by law into a contract of employment under Singapore law.
Wong Wei Leong Edward and another v Acclaim Insurance Brokers Pte Ltd and another suitHigh CourtYes[2010] SGHC 352SingaporeCited for recognition of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
Wee Kim San Lawrence Bernard v Robinson & Co (Singapore) Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2014] 4 SLR 357SingaporeCited for the principle that the concept of constructive dismissal and the implied term of mutual trust and confidence are distinct but closely related, and the latter is independently actionable.
Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in liquidation)House of LordsYes[1998] AC 20United KingdomCited with approval for the principle that there is a term implied by law in all contracts of employment, that the employer shall not without reasonable and proper cause, conduct itself in a manner calculated and likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of confidence and trust between employer and employee.
Brader Daniel John and others v Commerzbank AGHigh CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 81SingaporeCited for recognition of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
Lu v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustEnglish High CourtYes[2014] EWHC 690 (QB)England and WalesCited for the principle that the impact of the employer's behaviour on the employee must not be trivial, as the court does not generally manage the employment relationship in detail.
Gogay v Hertfordshire County CouncilNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2000] IRLR 703England and WalesCited for the principle that the court does not generally manage the employment relationship in detail.
Lewis v Motorworld Garages LtdNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[1985] IRLR 465England and WalesCited for the principle that the employee may rely on a series of actions on the part of the employer which can cumulatively amount to a breach of the term, even though each individual incident may not do so.
Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough CouncilNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2005] 1 All ER 75England and WalesCited for the principle that the employee may rely on a series of actions on the part of the employer which can cumulatively amount to a breach of the term, even though each individual incident may not do so.
Hameed v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustEnglish High CourtYes[2010] EWHC 2009 (QB)England and WalesCited for the principle that the employer's failure to formally inform one of the allegations against the employee did not render the investigation unfair since the employee was given, and took, every opportunity to respond to that allegation.
McNeill v Aberdeen City Council (No 2)Scottish Court of SessionYes[2014] IRLR 113ScotlandCited for the principle that the manner in which the employer carried out investigations amounted to a breach of the Malik duty of mutual trust and confidence.
London Borough of Lambeth v AgoreyoNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2019] IRLR 560England and WalesCited for distinguishing its facts from Gogay, and held that the suspension of the employee in its case did not constitute a breach of the implied term.
Johnson v Unisys LtdHouse of LordsYes[2003] 1 AC 518United KingdomCited for the principle that the implied term of mutual trust and confidence does not apply to the manner of dismissal.
Imperial Group Pension Trust Ltd v Imperial Tobacco LtdNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[1991] 1 WLR 589England and WalesCited for the propositions that the employer’s express contractual rights are subject to the implied obligation that they should not be exercised so as to destroy the relationship of trust and confidence, and that the employer’s express rights may be qualified by this implied obligation.
United Bank Ltd v AkhtarNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[1989] IRLR 507England and WalesCited for the propositions that the employer’s express contractual rights are subject to the implied obligation that they should not be exercised so as to destroy the relationship of trust and confidence, and that the employer’s express rights may be qualified by this implied obligation.
Stevens v University of BirminghamNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2016] 4 All ER 258England and WalesCited for the propositions that the employer’s express contractual rights are subject to the implied obligation that they should not be exercised so as to destroy the relationship of trust and confidence, and that the employer’s express rights may be qualified by this implied obligation.
Piattchanine, Iouri v Phosagro Asia Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2015] 5 SLR 1257SingaporeCited for the principle that principles of contract law apply to employment contracts as well.
Smile Inc Dental Surgeons Pte Ltd v Lui Andrew StewartHigh CourtYes[2012] 4 SLR 308SingaporeCited for the principle that an implied term cannot contradict an express term of the contract.
Chan Miu Yin v Philip Morris Singapore Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2011] SGHC 161SingaporeCited for the principle that it remained an open question as to whether Johnson ought to apply in Singapore.
Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd and others v Yeo Boong Hua and others and another appealNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2018] 2 SLR 655England and WalesCited for the principle that a key ingredient of the tort of unlawful means conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons to do certain acts.
Grace Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd v Te Deum Engineering Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2018] 1 SLR 76SingaporeCited for the principle that res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence that enables a plaintiff to establish a prima facie case of negligence in the event that there is insufficient direct evidence to establish the cause of the accident in a situation where the accident or injury would not have occurred in the ordinary course of things had proper care been taken, ie, absent any negligence.
Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 301High CourtYes[2018] 2 SLR 866SingaporeCited for the principle that one of the elements that must be proven for the tort of malicious falsehood to be established, is that the defendant had published to third parties words which are false.
James-Bowen and others v Commissioner of Police of the MetropolisNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2018] 1 WLR 4021England and WalesCited for the observation that case law had refrained from imposing a duty of care on employers to protect the economic or reputational interests of employees.
Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings LtdNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustYes[2004] 4 All ER 447England and WalesCited for the principle that the court refused to imply a term into an employment contract that the employer will take reasonable care for the economic well-being of his employee because such an implied term would impose an unfair and unreasonable burden on employers.
Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd and another appealHigh CourtYes[2006] 1 SLR(R) 112SingaporeCited for the principle that to have necessary standing, the plaintiff must be asserting the recognition of a right that is personal to him, and contested.

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

  • Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
  • Project Hudson
  • Platts Article
  • Business Integrity Department
  • Notification Letter
  • Dismissal Meeting
  • Trading Operator
  • Senior Freight Trader
  • ESI
  • Vitol

15.2 Keywords

  • employment contract
  • breach of contract
  • negligence
  • conspiracy
  • malicious falsehood
  • Singapore
  • High Court
  • Shell
  • trading
  • investigation
  • termination

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Employment Law95
Implied term of mutual trust and confidence80
Breach of Contract70
Negligence60
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means50
Malicious Falsehood40
Contract Law30
Res ipsa loquitur30

16. Subjects

  • Employment Dispute
  • Contract Law
  • Tort Law