[2021] SGHC 90

Wei Fengpin v Low Tuck Loong Raymond [2021] SGHC 90
queries on the accounts (in particular, the Big Bonuses) without good reason
(see [60] and [74] above).
83 The Defendants’ refusal to provide information to Wei on the basis that
they were confidential or sensitive information that Wei could use to advance
SH’s interest was unconvincing. First, they admitted in court that the financial
documents and information Wei sought did not contain confidential information
that could assist SH to undercut the Company, and that even the contact
information and identities of Apple’s representatives and end customers were
not confidential. In particular, the Defendants had even refused to give Wei
information regarding bonuses and dividends declared, although this
information would not have been adverse to the Company’s interests. 105
84 Second, the Defendants had taken a blanket approach to deny Wei, from
June 2016, non-confidential or non-sensitive information just because Wei was
purportedly seeking sensitive or confidential information; did not disclose the
audit of SH and its intended listing in China; and had tried to buy out Sim’s
shares. 106 I find their reasons unconvincing. They never informed Wei of the
reason for refusing him documents, until August 2017 when they issued a notice
of EGM to remove him as a director. On the contrary they had consistently
represented to Wei that they would provide him with the Company’s financial
information even after June 2016. Moreover, Low agreed that by June 2016,
Wei had already informed the Defendants that SH had been listed. 107 In this
regard, Wei had even in December 2015 informed them that he required
information relating to the Company as a necessary requirement for SH’s listing
105
30/9/20 NE 80–83; 1/10/20 NE 13–17; 13/10/20 NE 33–34, 95.
106
1/10/20 NE 17.
107
PCS at [62]; Wei’s AEIC at Tab 51; 1/10/20 NE 14–15.
36