[2021] SGHC 90

Wei Fengpin v Low Tuck Loong Raymond [2021] SGHC 90
picture of the Company’s financial position in 2015. 123 I find that the Defendants
had omitted to audit the Company’s accounts to deprive Wei of financial
information of the Company in the material years. Pertinently, even the FY2013
audited accounts were not disclosed to Wei until July 2018, despite it having
been filed with ACRA in 2016. 124
Diversion of corporate opportunity to LSW
96 At the material time, the Company was a 35% shareholder of SWTPL,
which was in turn a 100% shareholder of SWP, which was in turn a 100%
shareholder of Sei Woo Hi-Tech Polymer GmbH, a company incorporated in
Austria (“SWA”). 125
Wei’s case
97 Wei claimed that around January 2016, Low informed Wei that he
planned to incorporate LSW for the benefit of the Company and the Sei Woo
group. Low proposed that his father (Low YK), the Company, a Sei Woo entity
and one Peter Lehmann (“Lehmann”) be its shareholders with the Company
having a 20% share, and that LSW would employ liquid injection moulding
(“LIM”) technology from SWA. Wei did not agree to this as it was not in the
Company’s interests. The Company was then indirectly a 35% shareholder of
SWA and it did not make sense to divert SWA’s LIM technology to LSW,
which the Company would only own 20% of. Instead, the LIM technology
123
PB 507; 30/9/20 NE 68–69; 13/10/20 NE 67–70, 81–82.
124
30/9/20 NE 49–51.
125
28/9/20 NE 35; 30/9/20 NE 110–111.
42