SINGAPORE: A man who sued his father over a failed supermarket business, claiming he was verbally promised a larger share of the company and property, has had his case dismissed by the High Court.
“Although he says he asked the defendant many times to put the agreement into writing, those were all verbal requests,” said the judge. His son only started working in the company in 2003 after getting his master’s degree. In 2004, the father agreed to make his son CEO as he “wanted to groom” his son to take over.
“The defendant says he did not receive any resignation letter from the plaintiff and did not receive any indication that the plaintiff wished to resign.” The relationship deteriorated significantly by March 2018, when the father was in the midst of closing the company’s supermarket operations. The older man said he only found out about this verbal agreement after reading the article, and that he did not respond to the press because he did not want to make public the family feud.
The judge noted that the video recording submitted to the court was only about 4 minutes and 38 seconds long – when the entire meeting was about two hours. “For instance, during a portion of the video recording, multiple bouts of coughing were heard, but persons in the video were not seen coughing,” said the judge, adding that the son provided no explanation for the mismatch.
All because of money. Greedy.
父不作為不許告嗎？