Tort — Misrepresentation

26leadingjudgments · 6courts · tort

Tort — Misrepresentation is a tort legal concept that appears across 26 reported Singapore judgments in this corpus, decided between January 2024 and May 2026, heard in the High Court (General Division) (15), the Court of Appeal (4), and the Court of Appeal (International) (2). The most-cited authority within this corpus is [2024] SGHC 145, referred to by 6 other reported Singapore judgments here. The judgments listed below are the primary source for how the Singapore courts have applied this concept, ordered by how often each is cited within this corpus. This page reports those decisions; it is reference information, not legal advice.

Key questions about Tort — Misrepresentation

Which Singapore cases are leading authorities on tort — misrepresentation?

Within this corpus, the judgments most often cited by other Singapore decisions on tort — misrepresentation are [2024] SGHC 145, [2024] SGHC 277, and [2024] SGHC 177. The full list of 26 judgments applying this concept is shown below, each linking to the decision in full.

Which Singapore courts have decided tort — misrepresentation cases?

In this corpus, tort — misrepresentation matters were decided in the High Court (General Division) (15 judgments), the Court of Appeal (4 judgments), the Court of Appeal (International) (2 judgments), and the High Court (Appellate Division) (2 judgments).

How many reported tort — misrepresentation judgments are in this corpus?

This corpus contains 26 reported judgments that apply or develop tort — misrepresentation, decided between January 2024 and May 2026. They are listed below in order of how often each is cited within the corpus.

Which cases shaped Tort — Misrepresentation?

The Singapore judgments below apply or develop this concept, ordered by how often they are cited within this corpus.

[2024] SGHC 145

Banque de Commerce et de Placements SA, DIFC Branch & Anor v China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corporation Ltd