Thillainathan Aravinthan v EMC: Breach of Contract & Misrepresentation in Employment Termination
In Suit No 107 of 2020, Thillainathan Aravinthan sued EMC Information Systems Management Ltd Singapore Branch in the General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore, alleging breach of contract, misrepresentation, and failure to pay redundancy benefits, unutilised leave, sales commission and car allowance upon termination of his employment. The court, presided over by Lai Siu Chiu SJ, dismissed the plaintiff's claims, finding that the plaintiff was bound by the terms of the Long Term Cash Award (LTCA) agreement, that no misrepresentations were made regarding redundancy benefits or compensation for lost Restricted Stock Units (RSUs), and that the defendant had fulfilled its obligations under the employment contract.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Claim dismissed with costs to the Defendant.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Plaintiff sued EMC for breach of contract, misrepresentation, and unpaid benefits after termination. The court dismissed the claims, finding no breach or misrepresentation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thillainathan Aravinthan | Plaintiff | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | Ramesh Bharani s/o K Nagaratnam, Wong Teck Ming, Ong Ying Ting Eunice |
| EMC Information Systems Management Ltd Singapore Branch | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Won | Nair Suresh Sukumaran, Tan Tse Hsien Bryan, Sylvia Lem Jia Li |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lai Siu Chiu | Senior Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ramesh Bharani s/o K Nagaratnam | RBN Chambers LLC |
| Wong Teck Ming | RBN Chambers LLC |
| Ong Ying Ting Eunice | RBN Chambers LLC |
| Nair Suresh Sukumaran | PK Wong & Nair LLC |
| Tan Tse Hsien Bryan | PK Wong & Nair LLC |
| Sylvia Lem Jia Li | PK Wong & Nair LLC |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a director of sales from 15 January 2018 to 30 September 2019.
- Plaintiff claimed unpaid salary, redundancy, and other benefits under his employment contract.
- Plaintiff alleged Defendant promised redundancy benefits and compensation for loss of RSUs from previous employment.
- Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment on 1 September 2019, citing redundancy.
- Plaintiff received severance pay and salary in lieu of notice, but disputed the amount.
- Plaintiff signed an Employment Contract and a Long Term Cash Award (LTCA) agreement.
- Plaintiff claimed he was unaware of the terms of the LTCA agreement before signing the Employment Contract.
5. Formal Citations
- Thillainathan Aravinthan v EMC Information Systems Management Ltd Singapore Branch, Suit No 107 of 2020, [2021] SGHC 289
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff approached by TekSystems regarding position at EMC | |
| Dell Technologies Inc acquired Defendant | |
| Defendant conveyed employment offer to Plaintiff | |
| Plaintiff provided details of RSUs to Ambu | |
| Plaintiff received revised offer from Defendant | |
| Plaintiff received further RSUs from Cisco | |
| Ambu informed Plaintiff about uploading letter of offer | |
| Boyd informed Plaintiff about USD82,300 for Long Term Incentive | |
| Defendant's letter of offer | |
| Plaintiff received employment contract from Defendant | |
| Plaintiff resigned from Cisco | |
| Plaintiff spoke to Ambu seeking clarification on payment for loss in value of RSUs | |
| Plaintiff countersigned Defendant’s letter of offer | |
| Plaintiff commenced employment with Defendant | |
| Ambu left Defendant's services | |
| Plaintiff received US$27,433 from Defendant | |
| Ambu joined her current employer | |
| Defendant granted Plaintiff LTCA | |
| Plaintiff accepted LTCA | |
| Defendant increased Plaintiff's monthly salary | |
| Defendant invited Plaintiff to join President’s Club | |
| Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment | |
| Plaintiff received letter from Defendant informing him of last day of employment | |
| Plaintiff had meeting with Defendant and rejected offer of compensation | |
| Plaintiff's solicitors sent letter of demand to Defendant | |
| Plaintiff received S$31,341.32 from Defendant | |
| Plaintiff left Defendant’s services | |
| Cecilia Teh sent email to Plaintiff repeating total payout figure | |
| Plaintiff received S$91,282.39 from Defendant | |
| Plaintiff filed suit | |
| Trial began | |
| Trial concluded | |
| Judgment date |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found no breach of contract, as the defendant had fulfilled its obligations under the employment contract and the Long Term Cash Award (LTCA) agreement.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to pay salary
- Failure to pay car allowance
- Failure to pay sales commission
- Failure to pay unutilised leave
- Failure to pay redundancy benefits
- Misrepresentation
- Outcome: The court found no evidence of misrepresentation by the defendant regarding redundancy benefits or compensation for lost Restricted Stock Units (RSUs).
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Oral misrepresentation
- Fraudulent misrepresentation
- Collateral Contract
- Outcome: The court found that the claim fails in limine because the Plaintiff did not provide fresh consideration.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages for breach of contract
- Damages for misrepresentation
- Payment of outstanding salary and benefits
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Misrepresentation
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Employment Disputes
11. Industries
- Information Technology
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goldzone (Asia Pacific) Ltd (formerly known as Goldzone (Singapore) Ltd) v Creative Technology Centre Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2011] SGHC 103 | Singapore | Cited for the criteria for the formation of an oral collateral contract. |
| Lemon Grass v Peranakan Place Complex Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2002] 2 SLR(R) 50 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a statement must be promissory in nature or effect rather than representational for a collateral contract. |
| Inntrepreneur Pub Co (GL) v East Crown Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2000] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 611 | N/A | Cited for the requirement of animus contrahendi in the formation of a collateral contract. |
| Panatron Pte Ltd and another v Lee Cheow Lee and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2001] 2 SLR(R) 435 | Singapore | Cited for the five elements that a plaintiff seeking damages for fraudulent misrepresentation must prove. |
| Alwie Handoyo v Tjong Very Sumito and another and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that cogent evidence is required before a court will be satisfied that the allegation of fraud is established. |
| Cheah Peng Hock v Luzhou Bio-Chem Technology Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 577 | Singapore | Cited regarding the implied term of trust and confidence in employment contracts. |
| Broadley Construction Pte Ltd v Alacran Design Pte Ltd | N/A | No | [2018] 2 SLR 110 | Singapore | Cited to support the case of representations that were made by Ambu. |
| Peekay Intermark Ltd v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2006] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 511 | N/A | Cited for the proposition that a plaintiff would not ordinarily be held to be induced by a misrepresentation if the express contractual terms contradict the defendant’s misrepresentation. |
| Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in compulsory liquidation) | N/A | Yes | [1998] AC 20 | N/A | Cited regarding the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in employment contracts. |
| Alacran Design Pte Ltd v Broadley Construction Pte Ltd | N/A | No | [2018] 4 SLR 224 | Singapore | Cited to support the case of representations that were made by Ambu. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Employment Act (Cap 91, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Misrepresentation Act (Cap 390, 1994 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Employment Contract
- Long Term Cash Award (LTCA)
- Restricted Stock Units (RSUs)
- Redundancy
- Termination
- Misrepresentation
- Severance Pay
- On-Target Earnings (OTE)
- Sales Commission
- Car Allowance
15.2 Keywords
- employment contract
- misrepresentation
- redundancy
- termination
- LTCA
- RSU
- Singapore
- employment law
16. Subjects
- Employment Contract
- Termination of Employment
- Misrepresentation
- Redundancy Benefits
17. Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Employment Law
- Tort Law
- Misrepresentation