Bae Junho v Daimwood and London School of Business & Finance: Striking Out Claim for Psychiatric Injury
In Bae Junho v Samuel Lathan Daimwood and London School of Business & Finance Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard applications to strike out the plaintiff's claim for psychiatric injury. The plaintiff alleged that the first defendant's affair with his wife, and the second defendant's vicarious liability or non-delegable duty of care, caused him psychiatric harm. The court struck out the claim against both defendants, finding no reasonable cause of action under the tort of negligence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiff's claim against both defendants struck out.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court struck out the plaintiff's claim against the defendants for psychiatric injury resulting from an affair between his wife and the first defendant.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Junho Bae | Plaintiff | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Lost | |
| Samuel Lathan Daimwood | Defendant | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Won | |
| London School of Business & Finance Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Jean Chan Lay Koon | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiff was married to Jenna, both being South Korean nationals in Singapore.
- The primary cause of their marital breakdown was an affair between Jenna and the 1st defendant.
- The 1st defendant was an English language lecturer employed by the 2nd defendant.
- The plaintiff helped enroll Jenna in a preparatory English course with the 2nd defendant.
- The plaintiff installed a surveillance camera in his matrimonial home before a business trip.
- The 1st defendant and Jenna had consensual sex in the matrimonial home while the plaintiff was away.
- The plaintiff viewed the surveillance footage and suffered psychiatric injury as a result.
5. Formal Citations
- Bae Junho v Daimwood, Samuel Lathan and another, Suit No 1261 of 2018, [2019] SGHCR 09
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff helped to enrol Jenna in a preparatory course in English with the 2nd defendant school. | |
| Jenna formally commenced her preparatory course in English. | |
| Plaintiff started experiencing marital problems with Jenna. | |
| Plaintiff installed a surveillance camera in the living room of his matrimonial home. | |
| Plaintiff engaged the services of a private investigation firm. | |
| The 1st defendant and Jenna had multiple occasions of consensual sex in the matrimonial home. | |
| The 1st defendant and Jenna had multiple occasions of consensual sex in the matrimonial home. | |
| Dr Lim's medical report was issued. | |
| Suit No 1261 of 2018 filed. | |
| Hearing date for Summons No. 355 of 2019 & Summons No. 796 of 2019. | |
| Hearing date for Summons No. 355 of 2019 & Summons No. 796 of 2019. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Duty of Care
- Outcome: The court held that there was insufficient proximity between the plaintiff and the defendants to give rise to a legal duty of care.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Proximity
- Foreseeability
- Related Cases:
- [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100
- [2018] 2 SLR 588
- [1932] AC 562
- [2014] 3 SLR 761
- [2016] 1 SLR 1183
- Vicarious Liability
- Outcome: The court held that the 2nd defendant could not be held vicariously liable for the actions of the 1st defendant.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 5 SLR 549
- Striking Out
- Outcome: The court allowed the applications to strike out the plaintiff's claim.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1997] 3 SLR(R) 649
- [2012] 1 SLR 457
- [2012] 4 SLR 546
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages for Psychiatric Injury
9. Cause of Actions
- Negligence
- Vicarious Liability
- Breach of Non-Delegable Duty of Care
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Striking Out
11. Industries
- Education
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 100 | Singapore | Cited for the two-stage test to determine duty of care. |
| NTUC Foodfare Co-operative Ltd v SIA Engineering Co Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 588 | Singapore | Cited for summarizing the test of duty of care set out in Spandeck. |
| Donoghue v Stevenson | N/A | Yes | [1932] AC 562 | N/A | Cited for the principle that one must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which one can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure one's neighbour. |
| Anwar Patrick Adrian v Ng Chong & Hue LLC | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 761 | Singapore | Cited for developing the proximity requirement by holding that it may be apt to consider “proximity factors” in applying that requirement. |
| AYW v AYX | High Court | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 1183 | Singapore | Cited as a case involving an application to strike out a plaintiff’s claim against a school for breaching its duty of care. |
| Gabriel Peter & Partners v Wee Chong Jin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR(R) 649 | Singapore | Cited for the principles relating to striking out under O 18 r 19(1). |
| Ng Chee Weng v Lim Jit Ming Bryan | N/A | Yes | [2012] 1 SLR 457 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the power to strike out a claim can only be exercised if it is patently clear that there is no reasonable cause of action on the face of the pleadings. |
| Bunga Melati 5 | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 546 | Singapore | Cited for the guidelines to assist the courts in applying the test for striking out. |
| Ong Han Ling v American International Assurance Co Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 549 | Singapore | Cited for the principles of vicarious liability. |
| TPY v DZI | High Court | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR(R) 843 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a claim for damages for adultery and the tort of enticement have no known presence in Singapore. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap. 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Psychiatric Injury
- Duty of Care
- Proximity
- Foreseeability
- Vicarious Liability
- Striking Out
- Consensual Sex
- Surveillance Camera
- Matrimonial Home
- Preparatory Course in English
15.2 Keywords
- psychiatric injury
- duty of care
- negligence
- striking out
- Singapore
- High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Striking out | 90 |
| Pleadings | 80 |
| Civil Practice | 75 |
| Civil Procedure | 75 |
| Negligence | 60 |
| Torts | 50 |
| Family Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Tort Law
- Negligence
- Civil Procedure
- Striking Out