Judgment Header
Neo Siong Chew v Cheng Guan Seng and others [2013] SGHC 93
Court DecisionSGHC
[2013] SGHC 93
[2013] SGHC 93
General Division of the High Court of Singapore30 Apr 2013Suit No 326 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 [2024] SGHC 36
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
“ant was liable for 33.33% of the damages. I agree with the appellant’s submission that these authorities can be distinguished from the present case. The first case was Neo Siong Chew v Chew Guan Seng [2013] SGHC 93 (“Neo Siong Chew”) (GD at [126]–[128]). In Neo Siong Chew, the plaintiff (“Neo”) claimed against the firs”
“In coming to her conclusion, the DJ referred to the following passage in the High Court’s decision in Neo Siong Chew v Cheng Guan Seng and others [2013] SGHC 93 (“Neo Siong Chew”) at [49]:”
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 No 326 of 2011
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2013-04-30
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Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.