SINGAPORE – An ongoing boardroom dispute between the chairman and a former lead independent director of Singapore-listed CSE Global has not materially affected the company’s business or operations, the company said, as its shares stabilised after a sharp sell-down triggered by the director’s resignation.
Analysts have argued that the decline was unwarranted given the company’s strong fundamentals and continued operational momentum.
The engineering services provider on June 16 released detailed responses to queries from Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) following the June 2 resignation of lead independent director and audit committee chairman Tan Chian Khong, who cited “unresolved differences of views with regard to working with controlling shareholders”.
The differences in views are mainly between Tan and chairman Eugene Lai over a May 19 telephone conversation, with both men later offering differing accounts of what transpired and whether Tan had been asked to step down from the board.
Lai is also chairman of Heliconia Capital Management, the company’s controlling shareholder. Heliconia is backed by Temasek.
Tan said in a letter reproduced in the company’s filing that Lai had requested his resignation from the board and from his roles as audit committee chairman, nominating committee chairman and lead independent director.
Tan said he refused to step down as he had been elected by shareholders and believed he should serve his full term until the next annual general meeting (AGM).
“I refuse to resign as required by chairman/controlling shareholders because I was elected to the board by shareholders at AGM, and it is to shareholders I am answerable,” he said.
“Chairman said he does not agree, and wanted me to step aside sooner. I believe this is a breach of good governance and the proper authorities should ask why,” Tan added.
He also cited increasingly divergent views with Lai over the group’s operational direction and what constituted the critical success factors needed to strengthen the company’s operations locally and overseas.
In addition, he said he was unable to agree with what he described as repeated attempts by the chairman to pressure him, in his capacity as audit committee chairman, into taking punitive action against a member of senior management.
The disagreement was over differing views relating to preparatory legal and due diligence work for a proposed strategic review of the company by investment bank Jefferies.
Tan added that he eventually concluded that his position on the board had become untenable and resigned.
But Lai disputed several of Tan’s assertions.
He said he had merely shared his view, and that of Heliconia, that the company would benefit from a board refresh as it entered its next phase of growth, including the appointment of a lead independent director with mergers and acquisitions experience.
Lai said this was not a direction for Tan to resign and that he would have respected his decision to serve out his full term.
He also denied pressuring Tan to take action against the senior executive, saying he had only sought Tan’s views on the matter.
On concerns raised by SGX RegCo over board independence, CSE Global said four of its seven remaining directors are independent and continue to form the majority of the board.
The company added that the majority of members on its nominating, remuneration and audit and risk committees are independent directors, in line with the Code of Corporate Governance.
The nominating committee is now seeking candidates to fill the positions of lead independent director and chairman of the audit and risk committee.
“Pending the appointment, the board is satisfied that appropriate interim arrangements are in place to ensure independent oversight, enabling the board to make decisions in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.”
The board added that differing views among directors are a normal part of healthy governance and that the disagreements between Tan and Lai relating to working with the controlling shareholder have not had any material impact on the company’s business or operations.
It also acknowledged that some differences may have affected certain members of management, but said these had not materially affected their ability to perform their duties.
These latest developments come after CSE Global announced on March 5 that it is undertaking a strategic review “with the objective of maximising shareholder value”.
The request for a review was from controlling shareholder Heliconia, and came after the company received a preliminary expression of interest from an unidentified party regarding a potential “strategic transaction” involving the company.
The review also comes after CSE Global in November 2025 granted an Amazon subsidiary the right to acquire up to 63 million new shares in the company in the future, potentially making the US technology giant a shareholder of the company. Amazon is currently an existing customer of CSE Global, which builds and installs integrated technology systems for mission-critical operations in sectors like data centres.
Market watchers have speculated that the strategic review could lead to outcomes such as a privatisation, a sale of shares, a disposal of a major part of the business, or a merger. This has fuelled market speculation that Tan’s resignation may have stemmed from differences over the direction of the review.
However, neither Tan nor the company has explicitly linked the resignation to the review.
Jefferies Singapore was appointed as the financial adviser of the review, which is still ongoing.
Shares of the company have risen sharply over the past year, buoyed by the data centre boom and a lucrative long-term partnership with Amazon.
From around 50 cents in June 2025, the shares reached a peak of around $1.78 in May. They appear to have stabilised at current levels of around $1.37, after losing ground following Tan’s resignation.
On June 9, brokerage UOB Kay Hian argued that the sell-down of CSE Global’s shares was unwarranted because the underlying business remains intact, with strong revenue growth, rising orders and no changes to strategy or capital allocation.
It added that investors appear to be pricing in governance risks despite a lack of evidence that the boardroom dispute has affected operations, while undervaluing growth catalysts including the company’s Amazon relationship and sizeable order book.
