Ex-insurance agent suing Prudential for wrongful termination after working there for 19 years

SINGAPORE: A experienced insurance broker who was an organization head within his agency’s network of agents is suing his previous boss, Prudential Assurance Co Singapore, for wrongful termination.

Notice Jen Sen worked for Prudential for 19 years before his company arrangement was terminated in March 2022.

Mr. See claims that the termination was brought on by him allegedly blowing the whistle on Prudential’s alleged conduct in its business to the Monetary Authority of Singapore ( MAS ).

Mr. See is suing Prudential on grounds of unfair dismissal, unjust enrichment, and cruel contract terms.

Prudential successfully attempted to completely eliminate Mr. Recognizes claims, but only one of the two claims was overturned by an assistant registrar, leaving the claim of unlawful dismissal.

The striking out was then challenged by Mr. See, who was successful in a decision made available on Thursday ( Mar 21 ). He will also be able to bring all three of Prudential’s lawsuits to test.

Prudential is represented by Ms Joleen Wong Ying from JWS Asia Law, while Mr. Ragbir Singh Ram Singh Bajwa from Bajwa &amp, Co. represents him.

THE Reporting Investigation

According to the decision, Mr. See was the theme of a conformity committee’s investigation before his dismissal.

He was alleged to have allegedly sent grievances to MAS and the chief executive officer of Prudential under different pseudonyms, accusing Prudential of being dishonest.

This includes, in particular, the launching of supposedly deceptive ads for insurance products that were in contravention of MAS guidelines.

Mr. See’s attorney called these problems the “whistleblowing functions,” but Mr. See did not deny that he was to blame for them.

Mr. Discover claimed that his firm agreement was terminated inadvertently, which was a contract violation.

According to Mr. Discover, the dismissal was in part due to his whistleblowing practices, which are not grounds for terminating his contract.

He claimed that Prudential’s monetary gain from terminating his arrangement had been “unjustly enriched.”

This includes bonus commissions under the” Sell-Out scheme” and bonuses Mr. See was eligible for under an incentive program called the” Agency Leader Long-Term Incentive Scheme.”

The conditions of these extra repayments and income are disclosed in documents that were distributed to the agents, and they form the foundation of Mr. See’s next say that some terms of these terms violate the Unfair Contract Terms Act.

Prudential’s doctors, on the other hand, say that the dismissal was freely made and that Mr See was given see of his dismissal.

Justice Choo Han Teck argued in his ruling that the test judge’s authority to hear a wrongful termination say should be “in any case” strained.

He must be given the right to determine what reliefs or treatments a claimant seeks, according to Justice Choo, adding that the issues should be delved into as part of the whole narrative at trial.

After on, the test will take place.