The court has ruled in favour of Violet Oon and her children to buy out their business partner’s 50% stake in the business.
In a written judgement posted on Friday (19 Jan), the High Court judge ruled that the family entered a previous agreement due to “illegitimate pressure” from the business partner.
Source: Google Maps
Besides invalidating the agreement, the judge ordered the business partner to sell his shares at a “fair value”.
The valuation will be done by an independent valuer.
The case in question concerns culinary doyenne Violet Oon, her children, and their business partner:
When Violet Oon Inc Ptd Ltd was incorporated in 2012, the company’s shares were split among Ms Oon and her two children.
The breakdown was as such:
This arrangement lasted till December 2014 when Mr Murjani entered a subscription and shareholders’ agreement with the Oon family.
Source: Violet Oon Singapore
The Oon family’s shareholding in the company was halved following the move:
In 2017, Mr Murjani allegedly asked to be inserted into the brand’s narrative as co-founder — a move that Ms Oon saw as a personal attack.
Two years later, Mr Murjani accused the family of over-paying themselves even though the latter’s lawyer claimed they were in line with market rates at the time.
This led to the family being pressured into signing an agreement in February 2019. Some of the terms include:
In 2022, Mr Murjani offered to buy the family out for S$6 million — an offer that the trio rejected.
This prompted the Oon family to file a shareholder oppression suit against Mr Murjani.
In a ruling posted on Friday (19 Jan), High Court Judge Philip Jeyaretnam found that Mr Murjani had exerted “illegitimate pressure” on members of the family.
Calling the agreement “unfairly exploitative and manifestly disadvantageous”, the judge was of the opinion that the family would not have accepted the agreement if not for the pressure.
The judge also accused Mr Murjani of being manipulative throughout his interaction with Mr Tay.
In light of the findings, Justice Jeyaretnam ordered the family to buy out Mr Murjani’s stake in the business at “fair value”.
Noting that such an order constitutes “an interference with their property rights”, the judge pointed out that the company must carry Ms Oon’s name.
He also noted the children’s legitimate and reasonable desire to continue and uphold Ms Oon’s legacy.
For Mr Murjani not to be “punished” by the order, Justice Jeyaretnam said the valuation should be carried out by an independent valuer that both parties agree to.
In a statement to the media, the Violet Oon family expressed their gratitude to the court for their ruling:
The family is especially grateful for the Court’s findings, which serve to vindicate many of their true feelings and experiences regarding the events that have transpired over the years.
Moving forward, the Oon family said they will continue with their mission of preserving the heritage of Peranakan and Singapore food.
They also vowed to provide customers with the “most authentic and immersive culinary experience”.
Also read: Chef Violet Oon Rejects Businessman’s S$6M Offer To Buy Out Company, Takes Him To Court
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image adapted from Violet Oon Singapore and Google Maps.
The mother was saddened that the act of sending her money would be her son's…
One elevator is now functional while repairs on the second are expected to complete by…
The driver who hit one of the cats purportedly denied doing so and behaved angrily.
It has been marketed online as a candy that helps with male sexual enhancement.
"POP MART does not have any official licensed partners in Singapore," it said.
51% of Singapore's average monthly rainfall in November fell in northern Singapore over less than…