LO KOK JONG v ENG BENG
Outcome
Appeal allowedwe allowed the appeal.
Source: [2024] SGCA 28, Court of Appeal, decided 8 August 2024. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Steven Chong, Sundaresh Menon, Tay Yong Kwang |
| Charges / claim | Damages |
| Outcome | Appeal allowed |
| Counsel | Legal Solutions LLC, Victory Law Chambers LLC, Lim Hui Ying, Ooi Jingyu, VM Vidthiya, Yeo Kim Hai Patrick |
Source: [2024] SGCA 28, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (6)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Lo Kok Jong v Eng Beng [2024] SGCA 28 was a civil appeal decided by the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 8 August 2024, with Steven Chong JCA delivering the grounds of decision of the court, sitting with Sundaresh Menon CJ and Tay Yong Kwang JCA. The appeal, in Civil Appeal No 4 of 2024, arose from District Court Suit No 1467 of 2020 in which Eng Beng was the plaintiff and Lo Kok Jong the defendant. The case concerned a claim arising from a road accident, which would typically comprise general damages for pain and suffering and special damages for medical and other expenses.
The central issue addressed in the grounds of decision was how government subsidies and grants that defray medical expenses interact with the rule against double recovery in tort claims. The court observed that such subsidies and grants are payable, subject to certain criteria, upon the incurrence of medical expenses generally and not only in the context of accident injuries, and that claims including subsidies not paid for by the victim would on their face offend the rule against double recovery. The grounds noted a tendency in some decisions to analogise government payouts with the recognised exceptions to that rule. The appellant was represented by counsel from Legal Solutions LLC including Yeo Kim Hai Patrick, Lim Hui Ying and Ooi Jingyu, and the respondent by VM Vidthiya of Victory Law Chambers LLC.
[2024] SGCA 28 explained
LO KOK JONG v ENG BENG ([2024] SGCA 28) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 8 August 2024. It is categorised under Damages. 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 [2024] SGCA 28 about?
LO KOK JONG v ENG BENG ([2024] SGCA 28) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Damages — Special damages — Medical expenses”, “Damages — Measure of damages — Personal injuries”, and “Damages — Rules in awarding — Rule against double recovery”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 28 consider?
The judgment refers to Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (Cap 91A) and Pioneer Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2024] SGCA 28?
Within this corpus, [2024] SGCA 28 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 Lo Kok Jong v Eng Beng [2024] SGCA 28 decide?
Lo Kok Jong v Eng Beng [2024] SGCA 28 was a Court of Appeal decision of 8 August 2024 examining how government medical subsidies and grants interact with the rule against double recovery in a road accident damages claim, with Steven Chong JCA delivering the court's grounds of decision.
How did the Court of Appeal treat government subsidies in Lo Kok Jong v Eng Beng ([2024] SGCA 28)?
In [2024] SGCA 28, the court noted that government subsidies and grants defraying medical expenses are payable upon incurrence of expenses generally, and that including such unpaid subsidies in tort claims would on its face offend the rule against double recovery, with some decisions analogising them to recognised exceptions.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (25)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 28)