Judgment Header
Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143
Court DecisionSGHC
[2008] SGHC 143
[2008] SGHC 143
General Division of the High Court of Singapore29 Aug 2008OS 2125/2006, NA 49/2008
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 6 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
6Later cases and laws citing this decision
“In our view, the appellants are not entitled to claim aggravated damages for breach of contract. Contractual damages are compensatory in nature. In Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143 (“Kay Swee Pin (AD)”), which also involved the wrongful suspension of club membership, the Assistant Registrar”
“ons where the purpose of the contract itself was to provide peace of mind or freedom from distress (see, for example, the Singapore High Court decision of Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143 (“Kay Swee Pin”) – with the possibility that the scope of such an award might possibly be broadened in t”
“ed principles (see, for example, the House of Lords decision of Farley v Skinner [2001] 3 WLR 899, cited in the Singapore High Court decision of Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island County Club and others [2008] SGHC 143 at [68]), there would be a remedial lacuna as the plaintiff would be otherwise confined to an award of n”
“Mr Shepherdson relied heavily on the decision of AR Teo Guan Siew in Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143 (“Kay Swee Pin”), which to the best of my knowledge is the only reported decision in Singapore on the damages payable to a member as a result of the invalid suspension of a club membership.”
“Andrew Phang, “The Crumbling Edifice? The Award of Contractual Damages for Mental Distress” [2003] JBL 341 at p 343; quoted in the High Court decision of Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143 at [61]):”
Show 1 moreShow fewer
“Constitution, the plaintiff’s argument based on natural justice is properly founded in a claim for breach of contract. The basis for this was explained in Kay Swee Pin v Singapore Island Country Club [2008] SGHC 143 (“Kay Swee Pin (AD)”) at [33] as follows:”
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: OS 2125/2006, NA 49/2008
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2008-08-29
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.