Judgment Header
PPG Industries (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Compact Metal Industries Ltd [2013] SGCA 23
Court DecisionSGCA
[2013] SGCA 23
[2013] SGCA 23
Court of Appeal of Singapore14 Mar 2013Civil Appeal No 125 of 2011
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
This decision has been distinguished in a later judgment and cited in 1 other later decision. Confirm it is still good law before relying on it.
- Distinguished by [2021] SGHC 9
Detected automatically from later judgments; not a substitute for a citator check.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
2Later cases and laws citing this decision
“Thirdly, the CA’s decision in PPG Industries (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Compact Metal Industries Ltd [2013] SGCA 23 relied upon by the defendant can be distinguished as the facts are vastly different. In that case, the CA upheld the High Court’s decision that the respondent was entitled to claim from the appellant”
“e simply because the respondent had not called an expert of its own to counter Mr Goh’s evidence. As the Court of Appeal explained in PPG Industries (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Compact Metal Industries Ltd [2013] SGCA 23 at [10], the opinions of experts “will always remain as opinions and do not bind the court concerned.” It”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Civil Appeal No 125 of 2011
Case Metadata
Court: Court of Appeal of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2013-03-14
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.