See Jen Sen (Xue Rensheng) v Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) Ltd
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
Case Significance
See Jen Sen (Xue Rensheng) v Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) Ltd [2024] SGHC 76 was decided by the General Division of the High Court of Singapore on 18 March 2024, in Originating Claim No 466 of 2023 (Registrar's Appeal No 32 of 2024), with judgment reserved by Choo Han Teck J after a hearing on 13 March 2024. The claimant, See Jen Sen (Xue Rensheng), was an agent of the defendant, Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) Ltd, which carries on business as insurers. He held the rank of "agency leader" within the defendant's network of agents and had worked for it for 19 years before his agency agreement was terminated in March 2022. He sued the defendant for wrongful termination, unjust enrichment (the "UE claim") and a claim under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (the "UCTA claim"). The defendant applied to strike out the claim in its entirety, but the Assistant Registrar struck out only the UE claim and the UCTA claim, and the matter before the court was the claimant's appeal against the Assistant Registrar's orders. According to the judgment, the defendant maintained that the termination was lawful: clause 13(c) of the agency agreement allowed either party to terminate on notice, and the agreement was terminated on 21 March 2022 after the claimant had been the subject of an inquiry by a compliance committee. The catchwords record that the case concerned the striking out of pleadings. The claimant was represented by Ragbir Singh s/o Ram Singh Bajwa of Bajwa & Co, with the defendant represented by Joleen Wong Ying of JWS Asia Law Corporation.
Summary
The claimant, a former agency leader who had worked for the defendant insurer for 19 years before his agency agreement was terminated, sued for wrongful termination, unjust enrichment and a claim under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, and the matter came before the General Division of the High Court on his appeal against an Assistant Registrar's order striking out the unjust enrichment and Unfair Contract Terms Act claims. The court held that the issues were best left to the trial judge who would in any event hear the wrongful termination claim, so as not to fetter the trial judge's discretion. The court allowed the appeal, with costs reserved to the trial judge.
What was See Jen Sen v Prudential Assurance [2024] SGHC 76 about?
It was a General Division of the High Court appeal, with judgment reserved on 18 March 2024 by Choo Han Teck J, concerning the striking out of an insurance agent's claims against Prudential Assurance Company Singapore (Pte) Ltd for wrongful termination, unjust enrichment and under the Unfair Contract Terms Act.
Why was See Jen Sen's agency agreement with Prudential terminated?
According to the judgment, the defendant relied on clause 13(c) of the agency agreement, which allowed either party to terminate on notice. The agreement was terminated on 21 March 2022, after the claimant had been the subject of an inquiry by a compliance committee set up by Prudential.
Cases Cited (3)
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 76)