An Expensive Lesson: AXA Ordered to Pay Ex-Advisor S$3.2 million in Damages for Negligent Employment Reference

Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd [2016] 4 SLR 1124; Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 197

For the first time in Singapore’s legal history, an employer was held liable for negligently preparing an inaccurate employment reference against a former employee. Our team, including Suang Wijaya and Johannes Hadi, had the privilege of acting for Ramesh s/o Krishnan in this landmark case against AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd (now known as AXA Insurance Pte Ltd) (“AXA”).

Our client, Ramesh, was one of AXA’s best and top-earning financial advisers. In 2011, he left AXA and applied to join Prudential Assurance Company Singapore Pte Ltd (“Prudential”) and Tokio Marine Life Insurance Singapore Limited (“Tokio Marine”). Pursuant to Monetary Authority of Singapore (“MAS”) regulations, Prudential and Tokio Marine requested a reference from AXA before deciding whether to hire Ramesh. Contrary to the truth, AXA’s replies suggested that Ramesh’s performance at AXA had been “very poor” and also stated that he had been investigated for “compliance issues”. AXA also gave the same responses to MAS, which eventually led to MAS informing Prudential that certain conditions would be imposed on it if it decided to hire Ramesh. As a result, Prudential withdrew its application for an MAS license for Ramesh and decided not to hire him. Tokio Marine also similarly decided not to hire him.

We successfully litigated Ramesh’s case before the Court of Appeal, which agreed with us that AXA owed Ramesh a duty of care in preparing the references that it had sent to Prudential and MAS. It also found that AXA had breached this duty of care by including various inaccuracies and misleading statements in its references, which caused Prudential not to hire Ramesh. For its negligence, the Court of Appeal ultimately ordered AXA to pay S$3.2 million in damages to our client.

oangledes213

Recent Posts

Road Traffic Act: Updated Framework for Repeat Drink Driving Offences

Introduction In December 2023, a significant judgment was handed down in the case of Lee…

2 months ago

Eugene Thuraisingam LLP X Founders Doc: What is defamation from the case of Rachel Wong v Olivia Wu?

In a video collaboration between Eugene Thuraisingam LLP and Founders Doc, our Suang Wijaya and…

2 months ago

Eugene Thuraisingam as a Guest on the LegalCentred podcast

In February, our partner, Eugene Thuraisingam was invited as a guest on the flagship podcast…

2 months ago

Eugene Thuraisingam LLP Contributes to Singapore Chapter of Lexology Panoramic’s Anti-Bribery & Corruption Guide 2024

We are pleased to announce that Eugene Thuraisingam, Johannes Hadi and Ng Yuan Siang have…

3 months ago

Sentencing Mentally Disordered Offenders: Comparing the River Valley High and Upper Bukit Timah Killings

Introduction Under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code, which punishes a person who commits culpable…

3 months ago

The International Arbitration Review: Singapore

This article by our Hamza Malik originally appeared on the International Arbitration Review. Introduction Singapore…

9 months ago