[2026] SGMC 47
Magistrate's Court of Singapore7 Apr 2026
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Costs
The defendant’s driver damaged the claimant’s vehicle in a road traffic accident. The claimant entered interlocutory judgment against the defendant. At the assessment of damages hearing, I granted the claims for consequential losses, including the cost of renting a substitute vehicle during repairs.
2
This is a simple matter, and I would not have written a judgment but for the need to remind lawyers of some requirements that they tend to overlook when preparing these commonplace cases for hearing.
Costs
When a litigant seeks damages that are made up of the costs of renting a substitute vehicle or for loss of use of his vehicle, he must expressly state all relevant facts regarding his damaged vehicle in the text of his affidavit of evidence-in-chief. These facts include:
para
These are factors which the court would consider when deciding whether the daily rate of rental incurred, or alleged value of the loss of use suffered by the claimant was reasonable. All too often, however, and indeed in this case, the sole particular that is disclosed in the claimant’s affidavit of evidence-in-chief is the vehicle’s registration number, eg ABC 1234 Z.
4
Lawyers must be mindful that when they act for a claimant, their client bears the burden of adducing evidence to prove the measure of damages sought, even in the absence of the opposing party. They should not assume that the court will pose clarificatory questions to the witnesses, from which the relevant evidence could emerge when they are answered. If a claimant’s lawyer does not draft all the material facts into the claimant’s affidavit of evidence-in-chief, it only puts his client at risk of receiving nominal damages.
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.