PATRICK JOHN WEE EWE SENG v TRUE YOGA PTE LTD & 2 Ors

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 26 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC(A) 26 High Court (Appellate Division) 26 July 2023 AD/CA 67/2022 55 min read

7 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

We therefore dismiss the appeal against the Counterclaim in its entirety.

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 26, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 26 July 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	26 July 2023
Judges	Aedit Abdullah, Kannan Ramesh, Quentin Loh
Charges / claim	Contract, Equity
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	Arbiters Inc Law Corporation, Audent Chambers LLC, Oon & Bazul LLP, Angela Phoon Yan Ling, Jasleen Kaur, Joavan Christopher Pereira, Leong Hoi Seng Victor, Rai Vijay Kumar, Tan Zhengxian Jordan

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 26, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 26 July 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Contract — Breach — Breach of employment contract Equity — Fiduciary relationships — Duties — Duty of director to act in the best interests of the company

Practice Areas

Contract Equity

Judges (3)

Aedit Abdullah Coram Kannan Ramesh Delivered Quentin Loh Coram

Counsel (9)

Arbiters Inc Law Corporation Firm Audent Chambers LLC Firm Oon & Bazul LLP Firm Angela Phoon Yan Ling Counsel Respondent Jasleen Kaur Counsel Appellant Joavan Christopher Pereira Counsel Appellant Leong Hoi Seng Victor Counsel Respondent Rai Vijay Kumar Counsel Appellant Tan Zhengxian Jordan Counsel Respondent

Parties (4)

True Fitness (STC) Pte Ltd Respondent True Fitness Pte Ltd Respondent True Yoga Pte Ltd Respondent Wee Ewe Seng Patrick John Appellant

Case Significance

Wee Ewe Seng Patrick John v True Yoga Pte Ltd and others [2023] SGHC(A) 26 is a reserved judgment of the Appellate Division of the High Court, delivered on 26 July 2023 in Civil Appeal No 67 of 2022, with Kannan Ramesh JAD delivering the judgment of the court sitting with Aedit Abdullah J and Quentin Loh SJ. The appeal concerned the conduct of the appellant, Mr Patrick John Wee Ewe Seng, who was until 30 July 2021 a director and Chief Executive Officer of the respondents True Yoga Pte Ltd, True Fitness (STC) Pte Ltd and True Fitness Pte Ltd, all Singapore-incorporated companies. The central issue was whether his conduct constituted a breach of duty as Chief Executive Officer under his contract of employment and of his fiduciary duty as a director; having reviewed the parties' written and oral submissions, the court dismissed the appeal.

[2023] SGHC(A) 26 explained

PATRICK JOHN WEE EWE SENG v TRUE YOGA PTE LTD & 2 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 26) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 26 July 2023. It is categorised under Contract and Equity. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGHC(A) 26 about?

PATRICK JOHN WEE EWE SENG v TRUE YOGA PTE LTD & 2 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 26) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Contract — Breach — Breach of employment contract” and “Equity — Fiduciary relationships — Duties — Duty of director to act in the best interests of the company”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 26 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

This appeal concerned the appellant, the founder and former director and group chief executive officer of the True group of fitness companies, and whether his conduct breached his contract of employment and his fiduciary duties as a director of the respondent companies. The court considered issues including a variation of his salary and whether his employment was terminated with cause. It upheld the judge's findings that his salary had been reduced to $22,500 and that his employment was validly terminated with cause, and dismissed the appeal in its entirety.

What was Wee Ewe Seng Patrick John v True Yoga [2023] SGHC(A) 26 about?

It was an Appellate Division appeal decided on 26 July 2023, with Kannan Ramesh JAD delivering the court's judgment, over whether Mr Patrick John Wee Ewe Seng, a director and CEO of the True Yoga and True Fitness companies, breached his employment and fiduciary duties.

What did the court decide in [2023] SGHC(A) 26?

Having reviewed the parties' written and oral submissions, the Appellate Division, comprising Kannan Ramesh JAD, Aedit Abdullah J and Quentin Loh SJ, dismissed Mr Wee's appeal concerning his conduct as director and Chief Executive Officer of the three respondent companies.