Omae Capital Management v Tetsuya Motomura: Recovery of Pay & Termination Without Notice
In a suit before the High Court of Singapore, Omae Capital Management Pte Ltd, the Plaintiff, brought a claim against Tetsuya Motomura, the Defendant, alleging deceit and seeking damages. Motomura counterclaimed for arrears in salary, salary in lieu of notice, and reimbursement of expenses. The court, presided over by Judge Pang Khang Chau, dismissed the Plaintiff's claim due to their failure to participate in the trial and granted judgment for the Defendant's counterclaim, awarding him $43,400 for arrears in salary, $50,100 for salary in lieu of notice, and $13,400 for return of the rental deposit.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; judgment for Defendant's counterclaim.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case involving Omae Capital Management's claim against Tetsuya Motomura for deceit and Motomura's counterclaim for unpaid salary and wrongful termination. The court dismissed Omae's claim and ruled in favor of Motomura's counterclaim.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Omae Capital Management Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Dismissed | |
| Tetsuya Motomura | Defendant | Individual | Counterclaim Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Pang Khang Chau | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Arvind Daas Naaidu | Arvind Law LLC |
| Walter Ferix Silvester | Silvester Legal LLC |
4. Facts
- The plaintiff is a Singapore-incorporated company and a Registered Fund Management Company.
- The defendant was employed by the plaintiff as Executive Director and Chief Investment Officer in March 2013.
- The US Department of Justice began investigations into Rabobank for manipulation of the US dollar and Japanese yen London Interbank Offered Rate.
- The plaintiff alleged the defendant concealed ongoing Rabobank investigations to obtain a job.
- The defendant was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud in the US.
- The plaintiff claimed damages of $17,593,867.70 from the defendant.
- The defendant counterclaimed $93,500 for arrears in salary and salary in lieu of notice and $18,030 for reimbursement of expenses.
- The plaintiff's expert witness was uncontactable before the trial.
- The plaintiff's counsel applied to discharge himself on the eve of trial.
5. Formal Citations
- Omae Capital Management Pte Ltd v Tetsuya Motomura, Suit No 1053 of 2014, [2020] SGHC 126
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant employed by Plaintiff | |
| Plaintiff submitted Form 22A to Monetary Authority of Singapore | |
| Plaintiff obtained RFMC registration | |
| Defendant informed of possible charges in the US | |
| Defendant's employment terminated | |
| Criminal complaint signed against Defendant in the US | |
| Defendant resigned and left Singapore | |
| Leave granted for Defendant to give evidence by video-link | |
| Pre-trial conference held | |
| AEICs of Mr. Omae, Mr. Tan and the defendant were filed | |
| Judge PTC held | |
| Ms. Colchester's AEIC filed | |
| Plaintiff filed notice for setting down action for trial without payment | |
| Registry sent reminder to Plaintiff to complete setting down | |
| Plaintiff sought vacation of trial dates | |
| Plaintiff's counsel applied to discharge himself | |
| Plaintiff completed setting down of action for trial | |
| Trial commenced; Plaintiff declined to participate | |
| Defendant's evidence heard | |
| Judgment issued | |
| Judgment Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Recovery of Pay
- Outcome: The court ruled in favor of the defendant, awarding him $43,400 for arrears in salary.
- Category: Substantive
- Termination Without Notice
- Outcome: The court ruled in favor of the defendant, awarding him $50,100 for three months' salary in lieu of notice.
- Category: Substantive
- Discharge of Counsel
- Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiff's counsel's application for discharge.
- Category: Procedural
- Vacation of Trial Dates
- Outcome: The court proceeded with the trial despite the plaintiff's request for vacation of trial dates.
- Category: Procedural
- Plaintiff Refusal to Participate in Trial
- Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiff's claim due to their failure to participate in the trial.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Arrears in salary
- Salary in lieu of notice
- Reimbursement of expenses
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Deceit
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anil Singh Gurm v J S Yeh & Co and another | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 221 | Singapore | Cited and declined to follow regarding leave for defendant to give evidence by video-link. |
| Furniture & Households Square Ltd v Brosco International Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1997] SGHC 9 | Singapore | Cited regarding the court's discretion to disallow an application for discharge of counsel made on the eve of trial. |
| Su Ah Tee and others v Allister Lim and Thrumurgan (sued as a firm) and another (William Cheng and others, third parties) | High Court | Yes | [2014] SGHC 159 | Singapore | Cited for guidance on whether to grant judgment in default of appearance or judgment on the merits in respect of the defendant’s counterclaim. |
| Armour v. Bate | N/A | Yes | [1891] 2 Q.B. 233 | N/A | Followed in Asia Commercial Finance v. Pasadena Properties Development Sdn. Bhd. [1991] 1 M.L.J. 111 regarding costs of action and counterclaim to the defendant. |
| Asia Commercial Finance v. Pasadena Properties Development Sdn. Bhd. | N/A | Yes | [1991] 1 M.L.J. 111 | N/A | Followed Armour v. Bate [1891] 2 Q.B. 233 regarding costs of action and counterclaim to the defendant. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Securities and Futures Act (Cap 289, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Registered Fund Management Company
- Form 22A
- London Interbank Offered Rate
- Vacation of trial dates
- Discharge of solicitor
- Salary in lieu of notice
- Arrears in salary
15.2 Keywords
- Employment Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Termination
- Salary
- Singapore
- High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Employment Law | 95 |
| Civil Procedure | 70 |
| Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Employment Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Legal Profession