Wong Kee Wah v Sng Boon Chye: Commission Dispute over ATO Programmes
Wong Kee Wah, trading as The Education Future Hub, appealed against a decision in favor of Sng Boon Chye regarding commissions earned on programmes from Approved Training Organisations (ATOs). The Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore, comprising Woo Bih Li JAD, Debbie Ong Siew Ling J, and Aedit Abdullah J, heard the appeal on 25 October 2022. The court allowed the appeal, finding that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties applied to the programmes in question, and adjusted the sums payable accordingly.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Appellate Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding commission dispute between Wong Kee Wah and Sng Boon Chye over Approved Training Organisation (ATO) programmes. The court allowed the appeal, finding the MOU applied.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wong Kee Wah t/a The Education Future Hub | Appellant, Plaintiff | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
Sng Boon Chye | Respondent, Defendant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
---|---|---|
Woo Bih Li | Judge of the Appellate Division | Yes |
Debbie Ong Siew Ling | Judge of the High Court | No |
Aedit Abdullah | Judge of the High Court | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Wong Kee Wah is the sole proprietor of The Education Future Hub.
- The Education Future Hub markets programmes offered by Approved Training Organisations (ATOs).
- Sng Boon Chye is a sub-contractor of Wong Kee Wah.
- Wong Kee Wah and Sng Boon Chye signed an MOU on 1 January 2019.
- The dispute concerns commissions earned on various programmes.
- The ATOs receive funding from government-linked agencies.
- P informed D that any advance payment subject to IBF funding was subject to claw back if funding was rejected.
5. Formal Citations
- Wong Kee Wah (trading as The Education Future Hub) v Sng Boon Chye, Civil Appeal No 47 of 2022, [2022] SGHC(A) 36
6. Timeline
Date | Event |
---|---|
MOU signed between Wong Kee Wah and Sng Boon Chye | |
Advance commission paid by Wong Kee Wah to Sng Boon Chye for CAA programmes | |
Sng Boon Chye promoted CAA, TLI and BITC programmes | |
Sng Boon Chye promoted CAA, TLI and BITC programmes | |
Defence and Counterclaim (Amendment No 1) filed | |
Plaintiff’s Reply and Defence to Counterclaim (Amnd No 1) filed | |
Defendant’s AEIC dated | |
Plaintiff’s AEIC dated | |
Cross-examination of D | |
ACB (Vol II) dated | |
ASCB dated | |
Judgment delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Interpretation of Contractual Terms
- Outcome: The court found that the MOU applied to the programmes from the three ATOs, including the CAA programmes in question.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Application of contra proferentem rule
- Extension of MOU by conduct
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Education
12. Cited Cases
Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wong Kee Wah (trading as The Education Future Hub) v Sng Boon Chye | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 95 | Singapore | The Judge found that D is liable to P for school fees collected, advance commission paid, and a loan extended. The Judge also found that P is liable to pay D commission for promoting CAA, TLI and BITC programmes. |
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
- Approved Training Organisations
- ATO
- Commission
- Memorandum of Understanding
- MOU
- Skills Future Credits
- SFC
- Leadership People Management
- LPM
- Service Leadership
- SL
15.2 Keywords
- contract
- commission
- education
- training
- MOU
- agreement
17. Areas of Law
Area Name | Relevance Score |
---|---|
Interpretation of contractual terms | 90 |
Contract Law | 80 |
Breach of Contract | 70 |
Commissions | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Contract Dispute
- Commission Dispute