Lassiter v To: Appeal on Damages Assessment & Admissibility of Evidence

In Lassiter Ann Masters v To Keng Lam, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the assessment of damages for a dependency claim arising from a fatal motor accident. The appeal concerned the admissibility of further evidence before a judge in chambers after an assessment by the assistant registrar. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the judge had not erred in refusing to admit the additional affidavits, given the appellant's conduct during discovery and the assessment process.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal concerning damages assessment for a dependency claim and the admissibility of new evidence before a judge in chambers. Appeal dismissed.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chao Hick TinJustice of AppealYes
Choo Han TeckJudgeNo

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Mrs. Lassiter is the widow of Henry Adolphus Lassiter (HAL), a US citizen.
  2. HAL died in a motor accident in Singapore on 9 May 1994.
  3. Mrs. Lassiter filed a dependency claim on behalf of herself and her four daughters against Mdm To Keng Lam (TKL).
  4. A consent judgment was entered into apportioning liability between HAL and TKL in the ratio of 55:45.
  5. HAL and LPI came under Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the US, which was initially suppressed by Mrs. Lassiter.
  6. The assistant registrar rejected the appellant’s claim for loss of inheritance.
  7. The judge affirmed the AR’s decision to refuse the admission of 2S-AEIC, 3S-AEIC and 4S-AEIC.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Lassiter Ann Masters v To Keng Lam (alias Toh Jeanette), CA 97/2003/W, [2004] SGCA 10

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Motor accident in Singapore resulting in the death of Henry Adolphus Lassiter
Consent judgment entered into apportioning liability between HAL and TKL for the accident in the ratio of 55 and 45 respectively
Assessment commenced before the assistant registrar
First tranche of assessment concluded
Respondent submitted a report by Mr Hecht
Assessment resumed before the assistant registrar
Second tranche of assessment concluded
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Admissibility of Further Evidence
    • Outcome: The court held that the judge had not erred in refusing to admit the additional affidavits, given the appellant's conduct during discovery and the assessment process.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Suppression of vital facts
      • Failure to comply with discovery obligations
  2. Nature of Jurisdiction of Judge in Chambers
    • Outcome: The court clarified that a judge in chambers exercises a confirmatory jurisdiction and is not bound by the Registrar's discretion.
    • Category: Jurisdictional

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages for loss of dependency
  2. Loss of inheritance

9. Cause of Actions

  • Dependency Claim

10. Practice Areas

  • Civil Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ladd v MarshallN/AYes[1954] 1 WLR 1489N/ADiscusses the conditions for admitting new evidence on appeal.
Herbs and Spices Trading Post Pte Ltd v Deo Silver (Pte) LtdN/AYes[1990] SLR 1234SingaporeCited for the principle that a judge in chambers is not exercising appellate jurisdiction but a confirmatory jurisdiction when hearing an appeal from a decision of the Registrar.
Augustine v Goh Siam YongN/AYes[1992] 1 SLR 767SingaporeCited in support of the principle that a judge in chambers is not exercising appellate jurisdiction but a confirmatory jurisdiction when hearing an appeal from a decision of the Registrar.
Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Realty Pte LtdN/AYes[1999] 2 SLR 233SingaporeCited in support of the principle that a judge in chambers is not exercising appellate jurisdiction but a confirmatory jurisdiction when hearing an appeal from a decision of the Registrar.
Evans v BartlamHouse of LordsYes[1937] AC 473N/ACited for the principle that a judge in chambers is in no way fettered by the previous exercise of the Master’s discretion.
Chang Ah Lek v Lim Ah KoonN/AYes[1999] 1 SLR 82SingaporeCited for the principle that the judge in chambers was entitled to deal with the appeal from the Registrar as though the matter came before him for the first time.
Cheong Kim Hock v Lin Securities (Pte) (in liquidation)N/AYes[1992] 2 SLR 349SingaporeCited as an example of a case where the principles in Ladd v Marshall have been applied.
Ang Leng Hock v Leo Ee AhN/AYes[2004] SGHC 55SingaporeCited as a recent decision that adopted the approach that Ladd v Marshall applied to an appeal from an assessment of damages to the judge in chambers.
The Vishva ApurvaN/AYes[1992] 2 SLR 175SingaporeCited for the principle that on a matter involving an exercise of a discretion, the Court of Appeal should not disturb the decision of the judge unless it is shown that the judge misapplied the law, or misapprehended the facts, or that the decision was plainly wrong.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 1997 Rev Ed)
Order 56 r 1 Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 1997 Rev Ed)
O 57 r 13(2) of the Rules of Court
Order 32 r 1 of the Rules of Court
Order 2 r 1(1)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Civil Law ActSingapore
Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 1999 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Assessment of damages
  • Dependency claim
  • Chapter 11 bankruptcy
  • Fresh evidence
  • Confirmatory jurisdiction
  • Ladd v Marshall
  • Discovery obligations
  • Keyman discount
  • Registrar's appeal

15.2 Keywords

  • damages assessment
  • evidence
  • appeal
  • civil procedure
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Evidence
  • Damages