Reference no: EM13339677

Question 1

Julia went for an interview with Calypso Private Limited, one of the three companies in Singapore that manufactures sports medication for knee injury. This medication was developed specially for Asians’ physiology. Calypso owns the patent to this medication and has about 45% market share in Singapore. It has been trying to expand into South East Asia for the past 2 years. Unfortunately, despite many plans, Calypso seems unable to sell any products into any other countries in this region.

 

During the three rounds of interview, Julia assured the HR Manager, the Sales Director and the CEO that she has “all the necessary qualifications and experience to ensure that the sales of Calypso will improve by 100% within 6 months”.

Hence, Calypso offered Julia a job as a sales manager, responsible for driving all sales of the 

medication. She signed the employment agreement that contained the following Clause 8:

 

“The Employee shall not, at any time during the term of his employment 

with the Company and for a period of ten (10) years after the cessation or 

termination  of  his  employment  with  the  Company,  do  any  of  the 

following:

(a) directly or indirectly be engaged in any capacity (whether as an

employee, consultant, or director) with any business that is selling all types of sports medication anywhere in the world;

(b) solicit the business of any person who is or has been a customer of the Company, for the purpose of competing with the businesses of the Company; or

(c) entice away any employee of the Company to work for a business

that sells sports medication anywhere in the world.

By the fifth month, it was clear that Julia was a very inexperienced sales person. She has not been able to close a single sale in Singapore or the rest of South East Asia. She decides to quit and join a Japanese company selling all types of sports medication, for shoulders, knees, elbows etc. The Japanese company’s products are also patented and can be used by anyone, be it Asians or Westerners.

Advise Calypso on the enforceability of Clause 8 against Julia.

(1000 word)

Question 2 

Timothy was looking into undertaking extensive renovations in his HDB two-storey maisonette flat. He wanted new floor tiles for the entire flat, and to tear down the walls and merge two bedrooms into one large master bedroom. He wanted to build new floor-to-ceiling windows in the master bedroom and include various water features around the flat, including one underneath the stairwell and another hanging on the side of the kitchen wall. He even went around Singapore for a few months and managed to find a door from a genuine Peranakan house so that he can install it as the door to his main entrance. 

He spoke with QuiknEasi Contractors and told them that he needed the renovations 

completed by 20 September, so that he “can come back to a nice, beautiful home with 

soothing sounds of water” every night to watch, on TV, the Formula One Grand Prix race in 

Marina Bay Sands area. Timothy asked if the big panes of glass for the floor-to-ceiling 

windows would be safe. He emphasized that these windows are important to him as they let 

in natural light and allow him to wake up every morning “with a view of the world”. He also 

noted that the Peranakan door must be installed in its original condition as the door to his 

main entrance. 

QuiknEasi Contractors said that they have done many of such installation works and there were never any issues with safety. They even assured Timothy that the 20 September deadline is “not a problem… trust us”. The supervisor even noted down these details and Timothy’s request about the Peranakan door into his project specifications book. 

So Timothy engaged QuiknEasi Contractors as his renovation contractor. On 20 September, Timothy went back to his flat, pushed open the Peranakan door and was speechless after he stepped into the flat. 

 

The installed water features around the flat were leaking and dripping water onto the floor,  and after a few hours, the one hanging on the kitchen floor fell to the ground. The contractors installed the floor-to-ceiling windows but Timothy could hear the wind whistling through the windows into the room. Some of the panes even shook every time the nearby MRT train passed.

However, they did install the correct floor tiles for each room and repainted the entire flat in the correct colours. The supervisor was so proud that “they had even painstakingly rewired all the cables and used little interior décor “tricks” to hide the ugly wires”. The balcony was properly laid out with timber flooring and with the koi pond that Timothy wanted. They had also hacked down walls and reconfigured the rooms; unfortunately, it was the wrong rooms. So Timothy’s new enlarged master bedroom now faced the rubbish dump.

Timothy was so angry at the state of the renovations that he refused to pay the bill of S$150,000. 

Advise Timothy on his rights and liabilities against QuiknEasi Contractors. Discuss briefly his options and remedies (if any). 

(1000 marks) 

Question 3 Catherine is working as a Customer Relations Manager in a shipping and logistics company, ELDOC Pte Limited. She has worked for ELDOC and its Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for more than 6 years and has been dealing with customer enquiries and complaints on a daily basis. 

Over the years, she built up a reputation for being able to manage dissatisfied customers. In fact, ELDOC’s CEO trusted her judgement and did not stop Catherine from issuing and signing new contracts with discounts and rebates to disgruntled customers to resolve their complaints.  Customers  gradually  learnt  of  Catherine’s  fairness  in  handling  customer complaints and her win-win solution. 

A month ago, ELDOC’s CEO retired and a new CEO was appointed. The new CEO, James, was keen to bring in best practices from his previous workplace and started revising ELDOC’s standard operating processes (SOPs) and authorization charts for all departments. All of a sudden, Catherine found out from her supervisor (Amy, the Sales Director) that she is no longer authorized to issue nor sign any contracts with discounts and rebates to customers, without approval from Amy. 

Catherine found it difficult and time-consuming to run to Amy every time she needs to issue a new contract to a disgruntled customer, especially with the high volume of calls from customers every day. Sometimes, Amy is travelling and cannot be contacted for a few days. 

Hence, Catherine started to issue and sign new contracts with discounts and rebates to customers as part of the complaint resolution process, without discussing with Amy. She sent emails to these customers confirming the new contracts, but noted in her email that “I am only a Customer Relation Manager and am trying to do my best for you.” 

But when the customers started to claim on the new contracts with discounts and rebates, ELDCO refused to honour such contracts, claiming that these contracts were invalid. 

Advise the customers on their rights (if any) against ELDCO. Does ELDCO have any cause of action against Catherine? 

(800 marks)