Ting Jun Heng v Yap Kok Hua: Negligence & Contributory Negligence in Road Accident

In Ting Jun Heng v Yap Kok Hua, the Singapore High Court addressed negligence claims following a traffic accident. The plaintiff, a passenger in a taxi driven by Yap Kok Hua (first defendant), sustained injuries when the taxi collided with a vehicle driven by Ng Li Ning (second defendant). The court found both defendants liable, apportioning 65% of the liability to the first defendant and 35% to the second defendant. The court rejected claims of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed damages against both defendants for negligence in the driving of their vehicles.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff; first defendant responsible for 65% of the liability and the second defendant 35%.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court judgment on negligence claims arising from a traffic accident. Apportionment of liability between drivers and contributory negligence are key issues.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ng Li NingDefendantIndividualLiability ApportionedLost
Ting Jun HengPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Yap Kok HuaDefendantIndividualLiability ApportionedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Aedit AbdullahJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Wee AnthonyUnited Legal Alliance LLC
Fendrick KohUnited Legal Alliance LLC
Ramasamy s/o Karuppan ChettiarCentral Chambers Law Corporation
Teo Weng KieTan Kok Quan Partnership
Shahira binte Mohd AnuarTan Kok Quan Partnership

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff was a passenger in a taxi driven by the first defendant.
  2. The taxi was making a discretionary right turn at a junction.
  3. The second defendant's vehicle, traveling straight, collided with the taxi.
  4. The second defendant was exceeding the speed limit.
  5. The first defendant failed to keep a proper lookout when making the turn.
  6. The traffic lights were in favor of the second defendant.
  7. The plaintiff sustained injuries as a result of the collision.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ting Jun Heng v Yap Kok Hua and another, Suit No 307 of 2019, [2021] SGHC 44

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accident occurred
Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim filed
Trial began
Trial concluded
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found both defendants negligent in their driving, contributing to the plaintiff's injuries.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to keep a proper lookout
      • Exceeding speed limit
      • Breach of duty of care
  2. Contributory Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendants failed to prove that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to wear a seatbelt
  3. Apportionment of Liability
    • Outcome: The court apportioned liability between the first and second defendants, assigning 65% to the first defendant and 35% to the second defendant.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages for personal injury

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Personal Injury
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents
  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • Transportation

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Asnah Binte Ab Rahman v Li Jian LinCourt of AppealYes[2016] SGCA 16SingaporeCited for the principle that even with the right of way, drivers must exercise care when approaching a junction.
SBS Transit Ltd v Stafford Rosemary Anne Jane (administratrix of the estate of Anthony John Stafford, deceased)UnknownYes[2007] 2 SLR(R) 211SingaporeCited to support the principle that drivers must be aware of potential negligence or incompetence of other road users.
Ong Bee Nah v Won Siew Wan (Yong Tian Choy, Third Party)UnknownYes[2005] 2 SLR(R) 455SingaporeCited as a case that does not differ from the conclusion in SBS Transit Ltd v Stafford Rosemary Anne Jane (administratrix of the estate of Anthony John Stafford, deceased).
Cheng Williams v Allister Lim and ThrumuruganUnknownYes[2015] SGCA 15SingaporeCited for the factors considered in the apportionment of damages in the context of contributory negligence.
Joo Yong Co (Pte) Ltd and another v Gajentheran Marimuthu (by his mother and next friend Parai a/p Palaniappan) and othersCourt of AppealYes[2015] SGCA 38SingaporeCited by the second defendant to argue for a lower apportionment of liability, but distinguished by the court due to different facts.
Froom v ButcherUnknownYes[1976] 1 QB 286England and WalesCited for the principle that in a claim for negligence, the relevant question is whether the plaintiff is responsible for the injury suffered by him.
Parno v SC Marine Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[1999] 3 SLR(R) 377SingaporeCited for approval of the principle laid down in Froom v Butcher.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
Contributory Negligence and Personal Injuries Act (Cap 54, 2002 Rev Ed)Singapore
Civil Law Act (Cap. 43, 1999 Rev Ed)Singapore
Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Wearing of Seat Belts) Rules 2011 (S 688/2011)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Negligence
  • Contributory negligence
  • Apportionment of liability
  • Discretionary right turn
  • Speeding
  • Duty of care
  • Causative potency
  • Moral blameworthiness

15.2 Keywords

  • Negligence
  • Traffic accident
  • Personal injury
  • Apportionment
  • Contributory negligence

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Negligence95
Damages85
Contributory negligence80
Torts75
Road Traffic Act60
Evidence40
Civil Procedure30

16. Subjects

  • Tort Law
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents
  • Civil Litigation