Sim Cheng Soon v BT Engineering: Employer's Duty of Care for Workplace Safety

In Sim Cheng Soon v BT Engineering Pte Ltd and Keppel Shipyard Limited, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal regarding a workplace injury sustained by Sim Cheng Soon, a welder employed by BT Engineering, at Keppel Shipyard on 2002-06-22. Sim Cheng Soon claimed damages for personal injuries suffered due to the alleged negligence and breach of statutory duties by BT Engineering and Keppel. The court allowed the appeal in part, finding both BT Engineering and Keppel liable for failing to provide a safe working platform, and apportioned liability with 40% to the respondents and 60% to the appellant.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed in Part

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding workplace injury. Court found employer and shipyard liable for failing to provide a safe working platform, apportioning liability.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
BT Engineering Pte LtdRespondentCorporationLiability ApportionedLost
Sim Cheng SoonAppellantIndividualAppeal allowed in partPartial
Keppel Shipyard LimitedRespondentCorporationLiability ApportionedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes
Chan Sek KeongChief JusticeNo
Andrew Phang Boon LeongJustice of the Court of AppealNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Edwina FanKelvin Chia Partnership
N SreenivasanStraits Law Practice LLC
Palaniappan SStraits Law Practice LLC

4. Facts

  1. Appellant, a welder, was deployed to carry out welding work on a vessel at Keppel's shipyard.
  2. Appellant fell through an uncovered and unfenced opening at the level 2 working platform.
  3. Respondents maintained that the fall was from a ladder, not an opening in the platform.
  4. Photographs were introduced as evidence, depicting barricades at the location of the fall.
  5. Appellant claimed the planks covering the opening were removed a day before the accident.
  6. Appellant was found lying on his back on the deck after the accident.
  7. The working platform was more than 3m from the deck.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Sim Cheng Soon v BT Engineering Pte Ltd and Another, CA 140/2005, [2006] SGCA 43

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accident occurred at workplace
Lawyer's letter sent to respondents
Case filed in court (CA 140/2005)
Trial judge dismissed the appellant’s claim for damages
Judgment reserved
Court of Appeal delivered judgment

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Statutory Duty
    • Outcome: The court found that the respondents breached their statutory duties under the Factories Act and Regulations by failing to provide a safe working platform.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found the appellant contributorily negligent but also found the respondents negligent in failing to provide a safe working environment.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Admissibility of Evidence
    • Outcome: The court ruled on the admissibility of photographic evidence and the weight to be given to witness testimony regarding the photographs.
    • Category: Procedural
  4. Contributory Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found the appellant contributorily negligent and apportioned liability accordingly.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages for Personal Injuries

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Statutory Duty
  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Personal Injury
  • Workplace Accident Litigation

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Shipbuilding
  • Ship Repair

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Bohman v Jurong Town CorpCourt of AppealYes[1980-1981] SLR 167SingaporeCited to establish that unfenced edges of a platform are not 'openings in floors' under s 33(2) of the Factories Act.
United States Shipping Board v The Ship St AlbansHouse of LordsYes[1931] AC 632United KingdomCited to establish that a photographic picture cannot be relied upon as proof in itself of the dimensions of the depicted object or objects.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Factories Act (Cap 104, 1998 Rev Ed)Singapore
Workmen’s Compensation Act (Cap 354, 1998 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Working Platform
  • Scaffolding
  • Guard Rails
  • Factories Act
  • Contributory Negligence
  • Breach of Duty
  • Safety Helmet
  • Photographic Evidence
  • Ladder
  • Shipyard

15.2 Keywords

  • Workplace Safety
  • Personal Injury
  • Negligence
  • Factories Act
  • Shipyard
  • Construction
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Personal Injury90
Negligence85
Breach of Statutory Duty75
Contributory negligence70
Workplace Safety and Health Act60
Evidence50
Civil Procedure40
Construction Law30
Employment Law25

16. Subjects

  • Workplace Injury
  • Negligence
  • Statutory Duty
  • Evidence