SOH CHUAN SWEE & Anor v L.S. CONSTRUCTION PTE LTD

SOH CHUAN SWEE & Anor v L.S. CONSTRUCTION PTE LTD

The Claimants failed to prove breach of duty and causation. Monitoring reports showed vibration levels <2 mm/s and within the 5 mm/s limit, and credible expert evidence established such levels would not cause the alleged cosmetic damage; accordingly the Defendant was not negligent in performing the vibration-causing works. The Defendant owed a duty when it undertook goodwill repair works but the Claimants did not prove those repairs were performed below the requisite standard.

Citation
[2025] SGDC 253
Parties
Claimant: Soh Chuan Swee; Claimant: Tok Beng Kee; Defendant: L.S. Construction Pte Ltd
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
1 October 2025
Case Number
DC/OC 248/2022
Procedural Posture
Building and Construction / Negligence (district Court) / Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Claim dismissed; judgment for the Defendant
Legal Topics
Vibration Causing Works, Adjoining Land Damage, Repair Works, Duty of Care, Causation, Expert Evidence on Vibrations, Monitoring Reports
Source Language
English
Building and Construction Law Tort Law Negligence Vibration Causing Works Adjoining Land Damage Repair Works Duty of Care Causation +2 more

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Soh Chuan Swee

Claimant

Tok Beng Kee

Claimant

L.S. Construction Pte Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Building and Construction / Negligence (district Court) / Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant performed the vibration-causing works negligently
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant performed the initial repair works negligently

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimants failed to prove breach of duty and causation. Monitoring reports showed vibration levels <2 mm/s and within the 5 mm/s limit, and credible expert evidence established such levels would not cause the alleged cosmetic damage; accordingly the Defendant was not negligent in performing the vibration-causing works. The Defendant owed a duty when it undertook goodwill repair works but the Claimants did not prove those repairs were performed below the requisite standard.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; judgment for the Defendant

Orders

  • Claim dismissed.
  • Parties to file and exchange written submissions on costs (limited to 7 pages) within 14 days from the date of judgment.