HWA AIK ENGINEERING PTE. LTD. v Munshi Mohammad Faiz & Anor

HWA AIK ENGINEERING PTE. LTD. v Munshi Mohammad Faiz & Anor

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show any novel question of law or matter of public importance suitable for appellate determination: the applicable tests (Ng Huat Seng and Viasystems/Christian Brothers) were not inconsistent, the facts presented no novel point warranting appellate guidance, and the apportionment issue was not properly before the court as no contribution claim was made below.

Citation
[2021] SGAD 1
Parties
Applicant: Hwa Aik Engineering Pte Ltd; First Respondent / Appellant: Munshi Mohammad Faiz; Second Respondent: Interpro Construction Pte Ltd; Respondent: K P Builder Pte Ltd
Court
Appeals Board
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
17 March 2021
Case Number
AD/OS 5/2021
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons for Leave to Appeal to the Appellate Division Against General Division Judgment in a Personal Injuries Action / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed by Appellate Division
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Vicarious Liability, Apportionment of Liability, Contribution Claims
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appeals Tort Employment Law Leave to Appeal Vicarious Liability Apportionment of Liability Contribution Claims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hwa Aik Engineering Pte Ltd

Applicant

Munshi Mohammad Faiz

First Respondent / Appellant

Interpro Construction Pte Ltd

Second Respondent

K P Builder Pte Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons for Leave to Appeal to the Appellate Division Against General Division Judgment in a Personal Injuries Action / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed by Appellate Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When a permanent employer who lends an employee to a temporary employer can be held jointly or dually vicariously liable for the employee's torts
  2. 2 Whether the court can apportion liability between co-defendants in the absence of a formal contribution claim under ss 15 and 16 of the Civil Law Act
  3. 3 Whether the tests in Ng Huat Seng and Viasystems are distinct and which test applies

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show any novel question of law or matter of public importance suitable for appellate determination: the applicable tests (Ng Huat Seng and Viasystems/Christian Brothers) were not inconsistent, the facts presented no novel point warranting appellate guidance, and the apportionment issue was not properly before the court as no contribution claim was made below.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • No order as to costs