Ang Kuang Hoe v Chia Chor Yew: Negligence & Contributory Negligence in Road Accident

In Ang Kuang Hoe v Chia Chor Yew, the High Court of Singapore heard a claim by Ang Kuang Hoe for damages resulting from a road accident where he was struck by Chia Chor Yew's vehicle. The court, presided over by Belinda Ang Saw Ean J, found both parties negligent. Chia Chor Yew was found negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout and driving at excessive speed, while Ang Kuang Hoe was found contributorily negligent for crossing the road at an unmarked location when a pedestrian crossing was nearby. The court apportioned liability equally, awarding Ang Kuang Hoe 50% of the assessed damages.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff for 50% of assessed damages due to contributory negligence.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Ang Kuang Hoe sued Chia Chor Yew for negligence after a road accident. The court found both parties equally responsible, apportioning liability 50/50 due to contributory negligence.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ang Kuang HoePlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffPartial
Chia Chor YewDefendantIndividualJudgment against DefendantLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Liew Teck HuatNiru and Co
Devendarajah VivekanandaNiru and Co
P E AshokanKhattar Wong and Partners
Gwen VetuzKhattar Wong and Partners

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff was struck by the defendant's car while crossing South Buona Vista Road.
  2. The accident occurred on 14 May 2002 at approximately 7:10 AM.
  3. The plaintiff was a 22-year-old mechanical engineering undergraduate at the National University of Singapore.
  4. The defendant was driving his Mercedes-Benz along South Buona Vista Road.
  5. The speed limit on that stretch of road was 50 km/h.
  6. The plaintiff was crossing the road to catch a bus to Clementi.
  7. A pedestrian crossing was located within 50m of the accident site.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ang Kuang Hoe v Chia Chor Yew, Suit 549/2003/B, [2004] SGHC 29

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Road accident occurred
Suit filed (Suit 549/2003/B)
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found the defendant negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout and driving at an excessive speed.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Contributory Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found the plaintiff contributorily negligent for crossing the road at an unmarked part of the road when a pedestrian crossing was nearby.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Apportionment of Liability
    • Outcome: The court apportioned responsibility equally between the plaintiff and the defendant.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages for injuries sustained

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Personal Injury
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Chen Qingrui v Phua Geok LengHigh CourtYes[2001] SGHC 64SingaporeCited to show a similar case where the driver drove too close to the kerb.
Chapman v Post OfficeEnglish Court of AppealYes[1982] RTR 165England and WalesCited regarding liability when a vehicle hits a pedestrian on the kerb, but distinguished due to different circumstances.
Podrebersek v Australian Iron & Steel Pty LtdHigh Court of AustraliaYes(1985) 59 ALR 529AustraliaCited for the principles relating to the apportionment of responsibility in cases of contributory negligence.
British Fame (Owners) v Macgregor (Owners)N/AYes[1943] AC 197N/ACited regarding apportionment of responsibility.
Pennington v NorrisN/AYes(1956) 96 CLR 10AustraliaCited regarding apportionment of responsibility.
Stapley v Gypsum Mines LtdN/AYes[1953] AC 663N/ACited regarding apportionment of responsibility.
Smith v McIntyreN/AYes[1958] Tas SR 36N/ACited regarding apportionment of responsibility.
Broadhurst v MillmanN/AYes[1976] VR 208N/ACited regarding apportionment of responsibility.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Road Traffic (Pedestrian Crossings) RulesSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Negligence
  • Contributory negligence
  • Road accident
  • Apportionment of liability
  • Pedestrian crossing
  • Duty of care
  • Proper lookout
  • Excessive speed

15.2 Keywords

  • negligence
  • contributory negligence
  • road accident
  • pedestrian
  • apportionment
  • singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Negligence95
Automobile Accidents90
Contributory negligence85
Personal Injury80
Apportioning Liability75
Torts70
Road Traffic Act60

16. Subjects

  • Tort Law
  • Personal Injury Law
  • Traffic Law