Poh Chiak Ow v United Overseas Bank Ltd: Misrepresentation & Vicarious Liability
In Poh Chiak Ow v United Overseas Bank Ltd, the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore dismissed Poh Chiak Ow's appeal against the High Court's decision. Poh claimed United Overseas Bank was vicariously liable for its employee's alleged deceit concerning an investment in PixelTrade. The court found that Poh failed to prove the employee made the alleged misrepresentations and dismissed the appeal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Appellate Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore court dismisses appeal, finding UOB not vicariously liable for employee's alleged deceit regarding PixelTrade investment. Focus on misrepresentation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United Overseas Bank Ltd | Respondent, Defendant | Corporation | Appeal upheld | Won | |
| Poh Chiak Ow | Appellant, Plaintiff | Individual | Appeal dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judge of the Appellate Division | Yes |
| See Kee Oon | Judge of the High Court | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Poh was a privilege banking customer of UOB.
- Wong was Poh's relationship manager at UOB from early 2017 to August 2018.
- Poh invested US$500,000 in PixelTrade in October and December 2017.
- Poh claimed Wong made misrepresentations about PixelTrade being a UOB-approved product.
- Poh was unable to recover his investment in PixelTrade.
- UOB argued that Wong's conversation with Poh was on a personal level and not in his capacity as Poh’s relationship manager.
5. Formal Citations
- Poh Chiak Ow v United Overseas Bank Ltd, Civil Appeal No 11 of 2021, [2021] SGHC(A) 6
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Poh invested in four different bonds with Wong’s involvement. | |
| Poh invested US$200,000 in PixelTrade with Wong’s involvement. | |
| Poh invested a further US$300,000 into PixelTrade. | |
| Poh tried to recover his investment in PixelTrade but was unable to get any of his money back. | |
| Wong left UOB and Goh took over as Poh’s relationship manager. | |
| Meeting between Poh, Wong, and PixelTrade representatives. | |
| Poh accused Wong of deceiving him. | |
| Poh made a police report. | |
| Poh emailed UOB. | |
| Meeting between Poh and UOB representatives. | |
| Poh sent an email to UOB. | |
| Poh’s lawyers sent a letter of demand to UOB. | |
| Poh filed a writ of summons against UOB. | |
| The Judge released his decision in Poh Chiak Ow v United Overseas Bank Ltd [2020] SGHC 275. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment. |
7. Legal Issues
- Misrepresentation
- Outcome: The court found that the appellant failed to prove that the respondent's employee made the alleged misrepresentations.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- False representation
- Reliance on representation
- Inducement by representation
- Vicarious Liability
- Outcome: The court did not rule on whether vicarious liability was made out, as the primary issue of misrepresentation was not proven.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Employee's conduct within scope of employment
- Sufficient connection between conduct and employment
- Increased risk of tort being committed
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary damages (US$500,000)
9. Cause of Actions
- Fraud
- Deceit
- Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Banking Litigation
11. Industries
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poh Chiak Ow v United Overseas Bank Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 275 | Singapore | The judgment under appeal; the court refers to the findings and conclusions of the High Court judge. |
| Charles Lim Teng Siang and another v Hong Choon Hau and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 2 SLR 153 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing appellate interference with a trial judge’s factual findings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- PixelTrade
- Relationship manager
- UOB-approved investment
- Misrepresentation
- Vicarious liability
- My Wealth Planner form
15.2 Keywords
- misrepresentation
- vicarious liability
- banking
- investment
- PixelTrade
- UOB
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misrepresentation | 90 |
| Fraud and Deceit | 90 |
| Torts | 50 |
| Agency Law | 30 |
| Contract Law | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Banking
- Investments
- Financial Services
- Misrepresentation
- Agency