Pollmann v Ye: Damages Assessment for Personal Injuries from Road Accident
In Pollmann, Christian Joachim v Ye Xianrong, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore assessed damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, Christian Joachim Pollmann, in a 2014 road accident caused by the defendant, Ye Xianrong. The court, presided over by Justice Vinodh Coomaraswamy, determined the appropriate multiplier and multiplicand for calculating loss of future earnings and future medical expenses, ultimately awarding a total of $13,660,183.05 in damages to the plaintiff. The claim was for damages arising from personal injuries.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Assessment of damages for personal injuries sustained in a road accident. The court determined losses for future earnings and medical expenses.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Joachim Pollmann | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Ye Xianrong | Defendant | Individual | Damages Payable | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Vinodh Coomaraswamy | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiff suffered serious injuries in a road accident in November 2014.
- The defendant was found 100% liable for the plaintiff's injuries.
- The plaintiff was an Executive Director at Bank Julius Baer at the time of the accident.
- The plaintiff's injuries prevent him from returning to gainful employment.
- The defendant made interim payments of $3,100,000 to the plaintiff.
- The plaintiff's wife gave up her career to care for him.
- The plaintiff underwent treatment at a neurological rehabilitation clinic in Zurich.
5. Formal Citations
- Pollmann, Christian Joachim v Ye Xianrong, Suit No 908 of 2015(Assessment of Damages No 1 of 2020), [2021] SGHC 77
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff suffered serious injuries in a road accident. | |
| Statement of Claim filed. | |
| Defendant found 100% liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing began. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Assessment of damages hearing. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Assessment of Damages
- Outcome: The court determined the appropriate multiplier and multiplicand for calculating loss of future earnings and future medical expenses.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Multiplier
- Multiplicand
- Discount Rate
- Reasonableness of Medical Expenses
- Loss of Future Earnings
- Future Medical Expenses
- Related Cases:
- [2017] 2 SLR 229
- Judicial Notice
- Outcome: The court determined which economic and financial facts asserted in public documents could be the subject of judicial notice.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2009] 2 SLR(R) 587
- Standard of Proof for Future Losses
- Outcome: The court clarified the standard of proof required for establishing future losses, particularly in the context of loss of future earnings and medical expenses.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 1 SLR 145
- Mitigation of Loss
- Outcome: The court considered the plaintiff's duty to mitigate his loss, particularly in relation to medical expenses and travel costs.
- Category: Substantive
- Remoteness of Damage
- Outcome: The court applied the test of reasonable foreseeability to determine whether certain losses, such as the costs of cancelling flights, were too remote to be recoverable.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Personal Injury Litigation
11. Industries
- Banking
- Healthcare
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quek Yen Fei Kenneth (by his litigation representative Pang Choy Chun) v Yeo Chye Huat and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 229 | Singapore | Cited for the multiplier-multiplicand approach in determining damages for future losses and the conventional range for discount rates. |
| Poh Huat Heng Corp Pte Ltd v Hafizul Islam Kofil Uddin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 1003 | Singapore | Cited as endorsing the use of actuarial tables in determining the multiplier. |
| Chan Pak Ting v Chan Chi Kuen (No 2) | Hong Kong Court of First Instance | Yes | [2013] 2 HKLRD 1 | Hong Kong | Cited for the tiered discount rate framework. |
| Zheng Yu Shan v Lian Beng Construction (1988) Pte Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2009] 2 SLR(R) 587 | Singapore | Cited for the categories of facts for judicial notice. |
| Asia Hotel Investments Ltd v Starwood Asia Pacific Management Pte Ltd and another | High Court | Yes | [2007] SGHC 50 | Singapore | Cited as an example where the courts have historically taken judicial notice of economic or financial facts which can be evidenced by documents in the public domain. |
| Hauque Enamul v China Taiping Insurance (Singapore) Pte Ltd and another | Unknown | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 485 | Singapore | Cited for guidance on what amounts to an authoritative source for judicial notice. |
| Lai Wai Keong Eugene v Loo Wei Yen | Court of Appeal | No | [2014] 3 SLR 702 | Singapore | Cited to show that a plaintiff does not require the entire sum of the award to meet his expenses at any one point in time. |
| Tan Hun Boon v Rui Feng Travel Pte Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2018] 3 SLR 244 | Singapore | Cited as precedent for determining the multiplier. |
| Teo Seng Kiat v Goh Hwa Teck | Unknown | Yes | [2003] 1 SLR(R) 333 | Singapore | Cited as precedent for determining the multiplier. |
| Lua Bee Kiang (administrator of the estate of Chew Kong Seng, deceased) v Yeo Chee Siong | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 145 | Singapore | Cited for the standard of proof in assessing damages for future losses. |
| Donnelly v Joyce | Unknown | Yes | [1974] QB 454 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the loss is the plaintiff's loss, even if someone else provided the services. |
| Teng Ching Sin and another v Leong Kwong Sun | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 1 SLR(R) 382 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that travelling expenses incurred by a member of a plaintiff's family are not recoverable unless the visits were important elements in aiding his recovery. |
| Mykytowych, Pamela Jane v V I P Hotel | Unknown | Yes | [2016] 4 SLR 829 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the defendant is not liable for the additional cost incurred if the plaintiff is accustomed to a certain standard of travel. |
| Man Mohan Singh s/o Jothirambal Singh and another v Zurich Insurance (Singapore) Pte Ltd (now known as QBE Insurance (Singapore) Pte Ltd) and another and another appeal | Unknown | Yes | [2008] 3 SLR(R) 735 | Singapore | Cited for the test for remoteness in the tort of negligence. |
| The Arpad | Unknown | Yes | [1934] P 189 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that you have to pay damages resulting from the circumstances of which you have no notice. |
| Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd, The Wagon Mound | Privy Council | Yes | [1961] AC 388 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that you have to pay damages resulting from the circumstances of which you have no notice. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Retirement and Re-Employment Act (Cap 274A, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Multiplier
- Multiplicand
- Discount Rate
- Actuarial Approach
- Arithmetic Approach
- Precedent Approach
- Judicial Notice
- Mitigation of Loss
- Restitutio in integrum
- Synkinesis
- Functional Muscle Transfer
- Pre-trial Loss of Earnings
- Special Damages
15.2 Keywords
- Personal Injury
- Damages Assessment
- Road Accident
- Loss of Earnings
- Medical Expenses
- Singapore
- High Court
- Civil Case
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Damages Assessment | 95 |
| Measure of Damages | 95 |
| Personal Injury | 90 |
| Road Traffic Accident Law | 60 |
| Automobile Accidents | 60 |
| Civil Litigation | 50 |
| Civil Procedure | 40 |
| Evidence | 30 |
| Criminal Law | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Personal Injury
- Damages
- Negligence
- Civil Litigation