Billy is a Tenant of an Apartment Owned by David. Ten Days ago, Billy Received a Letter from David: Business Law Assignment, NTU, Singapore

Question 1
Billy is a tenant of an apartment owned by David. Ten days ago, Billy received a letter from David which stated that he (David) was “interested in selling” his apartment for $300,000, and asked Billy to let him know by post if he (Billy) was “interested”. Three days later, Billy posted a letter to David in which he agreed to buy the apartment for $300,000. After receiving Billy’s letter, David telephoned Billy and told him that he had changed his mind and that he did not want to sell the apartment.

Required: Advise Billy as to whether he has a contract with David for the sale of the apartment.

Question 2
Benson Ang is a professional financial advisor with 20 years of experience. Three years ago, he convinced retiree Samuel Cheng and his wife to invest their life savings in a China-based company, Xing Li Enterprises, promising them huge returns on their investments after three years.

Initially, Samuel and his wife were a little uncertain about investing all their money in this China company, but Benson said that he had already done all the necessary research and that Xing Li Enterprises was a China government-backed company with global investments. He also assured Samuel and his wife that the Chinese government had “guaranteed all investments” and therefore they had nothing to lose.

In fact, Benson did not do any research on Xing Li Enterprises; he was just keen on getting Samuel and his wife to make the investment, which would then entitle him to obtain a huge commission as a professional financial advisor. Recently, due to the trade war between China and the United States, Xing Li Enterprises collapsed and all those who invested in the company lost their investments,

including Samuel and his wife. When Samuel contacted Benson about the losses, Benson simply said that he was not liable given the uncertainty of the investment markets.

Required: Advise Samuel and his wife if they can hold Benson Ang liable for their losses.

Question 3
Abbey Road Pte Ltd’s directors are John, Paul, Ringo. Its shareholders are John, Paul, Ringo, and George. The company deals distribution of music CDs in Singapore and around the Asia Pacific Region. Recently, George was at a music store and while browsing through the store’s CD selection, he chanced upon several CDs belonging to US companies that have always used Abbey Road Pte Ltd to distribute their material in Singapore and the Asia Pacific Region.

Upon closer examination of the CDs in question, he saw that they were imported and distributed by a local company, Yoko Productions Pte Ltd. Upon checking with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA), the regulator of business entities, public accountants, and corporate service providers in Singapore, George discovered that the directors and shareholders of Yoko Productions Pte Ltd are John, Paul, and Ringo. He then realized that John, Paul ad Ringo have diverted Abbey Road’s business to Yoko Productions and that as a result of this, Abbey Road’s profit margins have been negatively affected.

At the next shareholders’ meeting of Abbey Road Pte Ltd, George confronted the other three shareholders over the diversion of business from Abbey Road to Yoko Productions. John, Paul, and Ringo contended that they had done nothing wrong and that it was perfectly legal to have started another business. They then proceeded to pass a resolution that approved their actions and further authorized them to continue to divert business away from Abbey Road to Yoko Productions.
Required: Advise George if there is any common law and/or statutory remedy available to him to challenge the resolution passed by the other three shareholders of Abbey Road Pte Ltd.