DOTS N TOTS INTERIOR PTE.LTD. v LIEW YEW LIAN & Anor

DOTS N TOTS INTERIOR PTE.LTD. v LIEW YEW LIAN & Anor

Claimant failed to prove existence of the alleged oral agreement and losses; payments were insufficient corroboration and evidence of duress was unproven; 1st Defendant entitled to commissions as calculated from Claimant's own disclosed documents and partially awarded $356,397; 2nd Defendant entitled to invoice sum $9,724.16; costs awarded in specified sums.

Citation
[2025] SGDC 278
Parties
Claimant and Defendant in Counterclaim: Dots N Tots Interior Pte Ltd; 1st Defendant and Claimant in Counterclaim: Liew Yew Lian; 2nd Defendant and Claimant in Counterclaim: LMG Design and Build Pte Ltd
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
17 October 2025
Case Number
DC/OC 244/2022|HC/DCA 20/2025
Procedural Posture
District Court Originating Claim and Counterclaims (contract and Employment) / Judgment Following Trial; Appeal Filed by Claimant (district Court Appeal No. 20 of 2025)
Outcome
Claim dismissed. 1st Defendant counterclaim partially allowed in the sum of $356,397. 2nd Defendant counterclaim allowed in the sum of $9,724.16. Costs awarded to Defendants in specified sums.
Legal Topics
Oral Agreement, Economic Duress, Commission Entitlement, Counterclaim, Amendment of Pleadings, Costs, Jurisdictional Limit
Source Language
English
Contract Employment Civil Procedure Duress Unjust Enrichment Debt Recovery Oral Agreement Economic Duress +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dots N Tots Interior Pte Ltd

Claimant and Defendant in Counterclaim

Liew Yew Lian

1st Defendant and Claimant in Counterclaim

LMG Design and Build Pte Ltd

2nd Defendant and Claimant in Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

District Court Originating Claim and Counterclaims (contract and Employment) / Judgment Following Trial; Appeal Filed by Claimant (district Court Appeal No. 20 of 2025)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral agreement existed obliging the 1st Defendant to repay alleged RC losses of $284,575.30
  2. 2 Whether payments of $80,000 and $200,836 were made under economic duress
  3. 3 Whether the 1st Defendant was entitled to unpaid commissions/incentives and the correct quantum

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant failed to prove existence of the alleged oral agreement and losses; payments were insufficient corroboration and evidence of duress was unproven; 1st Defendant entitled to commissions as calculated from Claimant's own disclosed documents and partially awarded $356,397; 2nd Defendant entitled to invoice sum $9,724.16; costs awarded in specified sums.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed. 1st Defendant counterclaim partially allowed in the sum of $356,397. 2nd Defendant counterclaim allowed in the sum of $9,724.16. Costs awarded to Defendants in specified sums.

Orders

  • Claimant’s claims dismissed in their entirety
  • Judgment for 1st Defendant against Claimant in the sum of 356397 SGD