CRESCENDAS BIONICS PTE LTD v JURONG PRIMEWIDE PTE LTD

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 9 consider?

The judgment refers to Civil Law Act (Cap 43). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC(A) 9 High Court (Appellate Division) 9 February 2023 AD/CA 87/2021 · AD/CA 88/2021 · AD/CA 128/2021 124 min read

26 cases cited (24 SG, 2 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Outcome

Appeal allowed

We therefore allow the appeal on this point as well.

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 9, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 9 February 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	9 February 2023
Judges	Hoo Sheau Peng, Quentin Loh, Woo Bih Li
Charges / claim	Damages, Contract, Building and Construction Law
Outcome	Appeal allowed
Counsel	Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP, Tan Kok Quan Partnership, Alexander Choo Wei Wen, Karam Singh Parmar, Koh Kia Jeng, Lau Wen Jin, Leong Lijie

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 9, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 9 February 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Damages — Quantum Damages — Assessment Damages — Remoteness Contract — Remedies — Loss of chance Damages — Measure of damages — Contract Contract — Remedies — Damages — Causation Contract — Remedies — Remoteness of damage Building and Construction Law — Damages — Delay in completion

Practice Areas

Damages Contract Building and Construction Law

Judges (3)

Hoo Sheau Peng Coram Quentin Loh Coram Woo Bih Li Delivered

Counsel (7)

Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP Firm Tan Kok Quan Partnership Firm Alexander Choo Wei Wen Counsel Respondent Karam Singh Parmar Counsel Appellant Koh Kia Jeng Counsel Respondent Lau Wen Jin Counsel Respondent Leong Lijie Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd Appellant Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd Respondent

Case Significance

Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd v Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd and other appeals [2023] SGHC(A) 9 was decided in the Appellate Division of the High Court on 9 February 2023, in Civil Appeals Nos 87, 88 and 128 of 2021, before Woo Bih Li JAD, Hoo Sheau Peng J and Quentin Loh SJ, with Woo Bih Li JAD delivering the judgment. The three appeals arose from the trial in HC/S 477/2015. CA 87 was Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd's appeal against the award of damages in Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd v Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd [2021] SGHC 189, and CA 88 was Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd's cross-appeal against that award. The catchwords address building and construction law, delay in completion, loss of chance, causation, remoteness of damage, and the assessment and measure of damages.

[2023] SGHC(A) 9 explained

CRESCENDAS BIONICS PTE LTD v JURONG PRIMEWIDE PTE LTD ([2023] SGHC(A) 9) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 9 February 2023. It is categorised under Damages, Contract, and Building and Construction Law. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGHC(A) 9 about?

CRESCENDAS BIONICS PTE LTD v JURONG PRIMEWIDE PTE LTD ([2023] SGHC(A) 9) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Damages — Quantum”, “Damages — Assessment”, “Damages — Remoteness”, and “Contract — Remedies — Loss of chance”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 9 consider?

The judgment refers to Civil Law Act (Cap 43). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

How influential is [2023] SGHC(A) 9?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC(A) 9 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

What did the appeals in Crescendas Bionics v Jurong Primewide [2023] SGHC(A) 9 arise from?

The three appeals (Civil Appeals Nos 87, 88 and 128 of 2021) arose from the trial in HC/S 477/2015. They addressed building and construction law issues including delay in completion, loss of chance, causation, remoteness, and the assessment of damages.

What were CA 87 and CA 88 in [2023] SGHC(A) 9?

CA 87 was Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd's appeal against the award of damages in Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd v Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd [2021] SGHC 189, and CA 88 was Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd's cross-appeal against the judge's award of damages.

Statutes Cited

Civil Law Act (Cap 43) Cases on this Act →

s 12(1)

Cases Cited (26)

SG (5)

[2019] SGCA 63 [2019] SGHC 4 [2020] SGCA 27 [2021] SGHC 189 [2022] SGHC(I) 2

SLR (19)

[1997] 1 SLR(R) 907 [2005] 1 SLR(R) 661 [2007] 1 SLR(R) 425 [2007] 3 SLR(R) 782 [2008] 2 SLR(R) 623 [2009] 4 SLR(R) 628 [2010] 1 SLR 1104 [2010] 2 SLR 1154 [2011] 1 SLR 150 [2013] 2 SLR 363 [2013] 3 SLR 433 [2014] 4 SLR 245 [2015] 3 SLR 488 [2016] 2 SLR 1056 [2017] 2 SLR 129 [2018] 2 SLR 655 [2020] 3 SLR 1234 [2021] 1 SLR 342 [2022] 1 SLR 302

UK (2)

[1950] 1 All ER 1033 [2005] EWHC 181