See Jen Sen v Prudential Assurance: Appeal on Striking Out Claims for Wrongful Termination and Unjust Enrichment

In See Jen Sen v Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by See Jen Sen against the Assistant Registrar's decision to strike out his claims of unjust enrichment and violations of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) following the termination of his agency agreement with Prudential. See Jen Sen's claims included wrongful termination, unjust enrichment, and breach of the UCTA. The court allowed the appeal, reserving costs to the trial judge, allowing the UCTA claim and unjust enrichment claim to proceed to trial alongside the wrongful termination claim.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed with costs reserved to the trial judge.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding the striking out of claims for wrongful termination, unjust enrichment, and UCTA violations. The court allowed the appeal, reserving costs to the trial judge.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
See Jen Sen (Xue Rensheng)Claimant, AppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon
Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) LtdDefendant, RespondentCorporationAppeal AllowedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The claimant was an agent of the defendant for 19 years.
  2. The claimant's agency agreement was terminated in March 2022.
  3. The claimant was subject to an inquiry by a compliance committee.
  4. The claimant was suspected of sending complaints to the Monetary Authority of Singapore.
  5. The complaints accused the respondent of malpractice in its business.
  6. The claimant did not deny responsibility for the complaints.

5. Formal Citations

  1. See Jen Sen v Prudential Assurance Co Singapore (Pte) Ltd, Originating Claim No 466 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 76

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Agency agreement terminated
Originating Claim No 466 of 2023 filed
Judgment reserved
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Wrongful Termination
    • Outcome: The court allowed the appeal, permitting the wrongful termination claim to proceed to trial.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Unjust Enrichment
    • Outcome: The court allowed the appeal, permitting the unjust enrichment claim to proceed to trial.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Breach of Unfair Contract Terms Act
    • Outcome: The court allowed the appeal, permitting the UCTA claim to proceed to trial.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2021] SGHC 219

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Unjust Enrichment
  • Violation of Unfair Contract Terms Act

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Insurance

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Benzline Auto Pte Ltd v Supercars Lorinser Pte Ltd and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2018] 1 SLR 239SingaporeCited regarding the requirement of a total failure of consideration for a claim of unjust enrichment.
Dathena Science Pte Ltd v Justco (Singapore) Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2021] SGHC 219SingaporeCited regarding the interpretation of clauses under the Unfair Contract Terms Act.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (2020 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Agency agreement
  • Wrongful termination
  • Unjust enrichment
  • Unfair Contract Terms Act
  • Whistleblowing
  • Agency Leader Long-Term Incentive Scheme
  • Sell-Out scheme
  • Agency Instruction

15.2 Keywords

  • wrongful termination
  • unjust enrichment
  • unfair contract terms act
  • agency agreement
  • singapore
  • insurance

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Agency Law