Judgment Header
Zhang Xiao Ling (personal representative of the Estate of Chan Tak Man, deceased) v Er Swee Poo and Another [2004] SGHC 21
Court DecisionSGHC
[2004] SGHC 21
[2004] SGHC 21
General Division of the High Court of Singapore10 Feb 2004Suit 1052/2000, NA 86/2003
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 3 other later decisions. Confirm it is still good law before relying on it.
- Distinguished by [2017] SGHC 07
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
4Later cases and laws citing this decision
“d, at the very least, be given 75% of the deceased’s monthly income. Reliance was placed on Zhang Xiao Ling (personal representative of the Estate of Chan Tak Man, deceased) v Er Swee Poo and Another [2004] SGHC 21 (“Zhang Xiao Ling”). However, that case is distinguishable from Mdm Sulastri’s case as that case concerne”
“ted that loss of the equivalent of EPF contributions is claimable. In the Singapore case of Zhang Xiao Ling (personal representative of the Estate of Chan Tak Man, deceased) v Er Swee Poo and Another [2004] SGHC 21, loss of CPF (the equivalent of our EPF) contributions was awarded. In Gul Chandiram Mahtani v Chain Sing”
“Zhang Xiao Ling (personal representative of the Estate of Chan Tak Man, deceased) v Er Swee Poo and Another [2004] SGHC 21 (“Zhang”)”
“In the decision of Zhang Xiao Ling (personal representative of the Estate of Chan Tak Man, deceased) v Er Swee Poo and Another [2004] SGHC 21 (“Er Swee Poo”), referred to in Sulastri at [57], an assistant registrar rejected the plaintiff’s estimate of the living expenses spent on her and their children (at [10]). Howev”
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: Suit 1052/2000, NA 86/2003
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2004-02-10
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Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.