CARLSBERG SOUTH ASIA PTE LTD v PAWAN KUMAR JAGETIA
Outcome
Appeal allowedWe allow the appeal in relation to the Relocation Claim.
Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 29, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 24 August 2023. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Appellate Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Aedit Abdullah, Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Debbie Ong Siew Ling |
| Charges / claim | Employment Law, Contract |
| Outcome | Appeal allowed |
| Counsel | Breakpoint LLC, Calvin Liang LLC, Yu Law, Calvin Liang, Chan Michael Karfai, Poon Guokun Nicholas, Yu Kexin |
Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 29, High Court (Appellate Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (7)
Case Significance
Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd v Pawan Kumar Jagetia [2023] SGHC(A) 29 is a reserved judgment of the Appellate Division of the High Court, delivered on 24 August 2023 in Civil Appeal No 52 of 2022, with Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD delivering the judgment of the court sitting with Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA and Aedit Abdullah J. The appeal, AD/CA 52/2022, was brought by Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd against the decision of a Judge in HC/S 114/2020, published as Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd v Pawan Kumar Jagetia [2022] SGHC 74. Mr Pawan Kumar Jagetia, employed within the Carlsberg Group between 26 September 2014 and 26 June 2019 and finally as a Senior Vice President, was sued by CSAPL to recover sums paid under an alleged implied term requiring his relocation to Singapore, with the judgment addressing breach of a contract of service and implied contractual terms.
[2023] SGHC(A) 29 explained
CARLSBERG SOUTH ASIA PTE LTD v PAWAN KUMAR JAGETIA ([2023] SGHC(A) 29) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 24 August 2023. It is categorised under Employment Law and Contract. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 2 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. 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) 29 about?
CARLSBERG SOUTH ASIA PTE LTD v PAWAN KUMAR JAGETIA ([2023] SGHC(A) 29) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Employment Law — Contract of service — Breach” and “Contract — Contractual terms — Implied terms”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
How influential is [2023] SGHC(A) 29?
Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC(A) 29 has been cited by 2 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.
What was Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd v Pawan Kumar Jagetia [2023] SGHC(A) 29 about?
It was an Appellate Division appeal, with Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD delivering the judgment, in which Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd sought to recover sums paid to former Senior Vice President Pawan Kumar Jagetia under an alleged implied relocation term, decided on 24 August 2023.
What did the employer claim in [2023] SGHC(A) 29?
Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd sued Mr Jagetia to recover sums paid pursuant to an alleged implied term in his employment contract obligating him and his family to relocate to Singapore, and alternatively sought recovery on the ground of unjust enrichment.
Cases Cited (10)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC(A) 29)