para
Introduction
Loading…
[2025] SGDC 268
District Court of Singapore8 Oct 2025DC/DC 2892/2020
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 1 later decision. No negative treatment detected.
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Later cases and laws citing this decision
“pplicant under this application. The trial judge had on 30 October 2025 rendered a costs award in DC 2892 (“Costs Award”) after the delivery of his judgment in De Beaute (SSC) Pte Ltd v Tan Mong Ngoh [2025] SGDC 268. The trial judge has fixed the party-and-party costs of the pre-trial work in DC 2892 (including pleadin”
Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
“merce et de Placements SA, DIFC Branch and another v China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corp Ltd (Shandong Energy International (Singapore) Pte Ltd, third party; Golden Base Energy Pte Ltd, fourth party) [2024] SGHC 145, the High Court held at [121] that in order for this exception to be engaged, the statements in question”
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
para
Introduction
para
Background Facts
para
The Action
para
The Plaintiff’s case
para
The Defendant’s case
para
Misappropriated Sums
para
The Trial
para
The Issues
para
My Decision and Reasoning
para
Whether the Defendant had failed to report for work on at least 17 Mondays without authorization?
para
Whether the Defendant worked less that her stipulated hours on days she was at work without authorisation?
para
Whether the Defendant received free massages/facial treatments without authorisation and was unjustly enriched?
para
Unauthorized Anna Treatments by Ms. Zhou and Ms. Han
para
Unauthorized Anna Treatments by Michelle Ung, Chan Yet Ngo, Rowena and Tong Tong
para
Whether the Defendant had provided Unauthorised Free Treatments/Upgrades to customers?
para
Did the Defendant grant the Unauthorised Free Treatments/Upgrades wrongfully by handwriting non-matching treatment packages in the Customer Treatment Booklets?
para
Damages claimable by the Plaintiff in respect of the Unauthorised Free Treatments/Upgrades extended to Ivy Bong and Lilian Seet
para
Anticipated losses not claimable
para
Actual consumption losses
para
Evidence of actual consumption loss adduced
para
Whether the business record exception applied
para
“In Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3556 (suing on behalf of itself and all subsidiary proprietors of Northstar @ AMK) v Orion-One Development Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and another [2020] 3 SLR 373 (“Orion-One”), the High Court held at [22] that the rationale for the business records exception is that a statement made in the ordinary course of business is a record of historical fact made from a disinterested standpoint, and which may thereby be presumed to be true. In Banque de Commerce et de Placements SA, DIFC Branch and another v China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corp Ltd (Shandong Energy International (Singapore) Pte Ltd, third party; Golden Base Energy Pte Ltd, fourth party) [2024] SGHC 145, the High Court held at [121] that in order for this exception to be engaged, the statements in question must have been made contemporaneously with the facts which have occurred, or as soon as the exigencies of the situation will permit.” [Emphasis added]
para
Whether it is in the interest of justice to exclude the hearsay evidence
para
If the Consumption Records were admissible, what weight should be assigned to the Consumption Records?
para
Amounts allegedly misappropriated by the Defendant
para
The $4,000 Payment
para
The $500 Payment
para
The $1,500 Payment
para
Conclusion
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.