Ng Siok Poh v Sim Lian-Koru Bena JV Pte Ltd: Damages for Nuisance & Negligence from Construction
Ng Siok Poh and Lim Hong Liu, as administrators of the estate of Lim Lian Chiat, sued Sim Lian-Koru Bena JV Pte Ltd in the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore on July 3, 2018, for damages to their property caused by the defendant's construction activities. The primary legal issue was whether damages should cover the cost of reinstating the property using micro-pile underpinning or aesthetic renovations. The court allowed the appeal in part, awarding damages for loss of amenity and the cost of replacing doors, but upheld the assessment of damages based on aesthetic renovations.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding damages for property damage due to adjacent construction. Court assessed damages based on aesthetic renovations, not underpinning.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NG SIOK POH (SUING IN HER CAPACITY AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF LIM LIAN CHIAT, DECEASED) | Appellant, Plaintiff | Individual | Appeal allowed in part | Partial | Cavinder Bull, Lin Shumin, Madeline Chan |
| LIM HONG LIU (SUING IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF LIM LIAN CHIAT, DECEASED) | Appellant, Plaintiff | Individual | Appeal allowed in part | Partial | Cavinder Bull, Lin Shumin, Madeline Chan |
| SIM LIAN-KORU BENA JV PTE LTD | Respondent, Defendant | Corporation | Damages assessed using the Aesthetics Method | Partial | Mahendra Prasad Rai, Dean Salleh |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| Judith Prakash | Judge of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Cavinder Bull | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Lin Shumin | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Madeline Chan | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Mahendra Prasad Rai | Cooma & Rai |
| Dean Salleh | Cooma & Rai |
4. Facts
- The respondent's excavation caused the soil around the Property to shift.
- The Property began to tilt towards the excavation site.
- The tilt was first discovered in late March 2009.
- Interlocutory judgment was entered in favor of the appellants.
- The trial centered on the assessment of damages.
- The Judge awarded damages for the cost of aesthetic renovations.
- The 2016 Measurements showed that the Property‘s absolute tilt ranged from 1/78 to 1/150.
5. Formal Citations
- Ng Siok Poh (administratrix of the estate of Lim Lian Chiat, deceased) and another v Sim Lian-Koru Bena JV Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 130 of 2017, [2018] SGCA 35
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Respondent began developing a condominium known as “The Amery” | |
| Excavation caused the soil around the Property to shift | |
| Property began to tilt towards the excavation site | |
| Tilt was first discovered | |
| Parties jointly inspected the Property | |
| Tiltmeters were installed on the Property | |
| BCA issued the respondent with a Stop Work Order | |
| Basement slabs for The Amery were cast | |
| Dr Yong prepared a further report on his assessment of the tilt of the Property | |
| Tilt continued to be monitored using measurements from the two tiltmeters until July 2010 | |
| Final tiltmeter measurement was taken in July 2012 for a review | |
| JIB Specialist Consultants Pte Ltd prepared a report | |
| Appellants commenced the suit | |
| Interlocutory judgment was entered by consent | |
| First tranche of the assessment of damages was heard | |
| Judge conducted a site visit | |
| Appellant applied for leave of court to adduce further evidence of the “current state of the tilt” of the Property | |
| Judge granted the appellant’s application in part and re-opened the trial | |
| Joint surveyor produced data of the absolute tilt surveyed | |
| Mr Lim K C and Prof Tan were cross-examined | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment |
7. Legal Issues
- Measure of Damages
- Outcome: The court held that the appropriate measure of damages was reinstatement costs, but assessed damages based on the Aesthetics Method rather than the Underpinning Method.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Reasonableness of reinstatement costs
- Proportionality of costs to loss suffered
- Weighing relative costs and benefits of reinstatement methods
- Loss of Amenity
- Outcome: The court awarded damages for past loss of amenity from 2009 until the property is reinstated by the Aesthetics Method.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Discomfort and inconvenience arising from injury to property
- Interference with enjoyment of property
8. Remedies Sought
- Cost of reinstating the Property to its original state without the tilt
- Costs of alternative accommodation and transport expenses
- Damages for loss of amenity
9. Cause of Actions
- Private Nuisance
- Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Construction Defect Litigation
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ng Siok Poh (administratrix of the estate of Lim Lian Chiat, deceased) and another v Sim Lian-Koru Bena JV Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 231 | Singapore | Cited as the grounds of decision for the trial below, where the Judge awarded damages for the cost of aesthetic renovations. |
| Lodge Holes Colliery Company, Limited v Mayor of Wednesbury | House of Lords | Yes | [1908] AC 323 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a party wronged must act reasonably in repairing the injury, and the court should be slow to object to the methods used by the injured party. |
| Dodd Properties Ltd and another v Canterbury City Council and others | English High Court | Yes | [1980] 1 WLR 433 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the plaintiffs are entitled to the reasonable cost of doing reasonable work of restoration and repair, but not to insist on complete and meticulous restoration when a reasonable building owner would be content with less extensive work. |
| Walter Frederick Scutt v John Lomax | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] WL 394 | England and Wales | Cited as an illustration of how a property's special value is taken into account in the assessment of reasonableness, but does not mandate full reinstatement at all costs. |
| Douglas Bryant and another v Frank Harvey MacKlin and another | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2005] EWCA Civ 762 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the court may supplement an award for reinstatement with an award for the partial loss of amenity to the respective claimants. |
| Ward v Cannock Chase District Council | English High Court | Yes | [1985] 3 All ER 537 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that damages were awarded for the discomfort experienced by the plaintiffs due to the council property falling into disrepair and creating a hole in the plaintiffs’ roof, until the date that the plaintiffs’ property was restored. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Micro-pile underpinning
- Aesthetic renovations
- Safety Limits
- Tiltmeters
- Absolute tilt
- Reinstatement costs
- Loss of amenity
- Building and Construction Authority
- Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design
15.2 Keywords
- construction
- nuisance
- negligence
- damages
- property damage
- reinstatement
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Construction Dispute
- Tort Law
- Damages
17. Areas of Law
- Tort
- Private Nuisance
- Negligence
- Civil Procedure
- Construction Law