‘He started to control my life’: Violet Oon testifies how she lost founder status for eponymous brand

RENOWNED Peranakan chef and restaurateur Violet Oon detailed before the High Court on Tuesday (Jul 11) the “outrageous” case of how she lost her status as founder of her eponymous brand, Violet Oon Singapore. 

Testifying as the first witness in the civil case she and her two children brought against their business partner Manoj Murjani alleging oppression, Oon said she was outraged after realising that Murjani wanted to be known as a founder some years into their partnership.

Back-and-forth negotiations ensued before the family came to a compromise with Murjani to call them all “co-creators” instead. 

Giving further insight that her daughter Tay Su-Lyn had called it a “compromise”, but not her, Oon told the court: “It was not a compromise. I’ve lost everything, and he (Murjani) has gained something.”

Oon said these while being cross-examined by Murjani’s lawyer, Stephanie Chew of TSMP Law Corporation, with Justice Philip Jeyaretnam presiding over the trial.

Chew was questioning her on why e-mail correspondences between her family and Murjani in 2017 and 2018 had stayed cordial when Oon was now calling Murjani “unscrupulous” in his dealings, based on her affidavit supporting the trial. 

Chew demonstrated the cordial relationship by pointing out that Oon had signed off a 2017 e-mail saying that gula melaka cake will be sent to Murjani the next day, to which Oon retorted “I am very polite”, as she affirmed tensions already present between parties.

The court heard that Murjani – who had credited the creation of globally recognised brands, including Tommy Hilfiger and Gloria Vanderbilt, to himself and his family – approached the Oon family in 2014, offering mentorship and guidance to take the Violet Oon name international. 

Believing that he had a part to play in TWG Tea’s branding, the family welcomed him into the fold by giving him a 50 per cent stake in the company, as they had also wanted to find a consultant or partner to bring the business to the “next level”.

At that time, Oon, who had already earned herself a reputation as Singapore’s food ambassador, said Murjani was “waxing lyrical” about the Violet Oon brand, saying how he loved the brand. Oon thought Murjani was buying into the existing brand narrative, telling the court “nowhere did he tell us he was going to change it”.

Tensions started building in late 2017. On Nov 14, 2017, Oon received an email from Murjani suggesting a write-up for the company’s website which put his name before her and her children’s, when listing parties behind the partnership.

Oon testified that she viewed it as an attack on her. “I objected to the fact that his name came first, to be honest, because we formed the business and the brand and the company. The brand was rooted in me,” she told the court.

She continued: “The word ‘founded’ to me was insidious, because Manoj knows how important the word ‘founder’ is. He is fighting for it in court.” 

The court case Oon referred to was Murjani’s then ongoing trial with TWG, where he alleged that its other co-founders had maliciously and wrongfully excluded him as a co-founder in the media and public narrative. 

Oon asserted that the Violet Oon brand story was the “family legacy story”, which Murjani was not part of. “A brand story does not include the investor, somebody who even comes and creates,” she added. Oon also said she was “not talking about vanity” when guarding the brand story, as she was concerned about brand dilution, which she noted was what Murjani should have known, as a “brand expert”.

These thoughts had led her to pluck up the courage to confront Murjani in a meeting in around October 2018, where she read out a letter laying on how he seemed intent on rewriting the company’s history and belittling the Oon family. 

The letter carried the line: “Yes, you have played a big part in rebranding it, and making the brand a success, but you do not own me, and you have not bought us out.”

Oon said it took a lot out of her to do so as Murjani was a “very charming, very assertive person, and very sure of his own right”. “I am not used to encountering somebody like that.”

The situation escalated when Murjani accused the family of overpaying themselves the salaries they drew from the company between January 2015 and November 2018, without his approval. 

Oon described it as “scary” as Murjani would eventually claim that S$1.55 million was the price the company – indirectly, the Oon family – had to pay to resolve the issue, inflating it from an initial claim of S$511,804. “How could he create money out of nothing?” she remarked.

This was in the lead-up to Oon feeling forced into agreeing to terms entered into in February 2019, which gave Murjani control as chief executive officer and chairman of the board, among other unfavourable terms. 

“I was forced into it based on his behaviour,” said Oon, as she volunteered an example of what Murjani and his wife said when she mentioned that she was thinking of coming up with a book. Court documents stated that Oon was prohibited from launching her personal autobiography until the company launched a book as part of the 2019 terms.

Pointing out that they had told her things like “not negotiable”, “we won’t accept this”, and “what is this?”, Oon said: “It was very frightening, especially when I just met somebody casually and I’m just talking about my book. Next thing I know, I can’t write my book...

“He started to control my life,” she said.