Spandeck Engineering v Defence Science and Technology Agency
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Spandeck_Engineering_v_Defence_Science_and_Technology_Agency
Spandeck Engineering v Defence Science and Technology Agency [2007] SGCA 37 was a landmark decision in Singapore law. It established a new framework for establishing a duty of care, differentiating the Singaporean law of tort from past English common law precedent such as Caparo v Dickman and Anns v Merton, whilst also allowing for claims in pure economic loss, which are generally not allowed in English law.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Spandeck Engineering v Defence Science and Technology Agency
xsd:integer
71636243
xsd:integer
1121555924
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
[2007] 4 SLR 100
rdf:langString
[2007] SGCA 37
rdf:langString
Spandeck Engineering Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Andrew Phang
rdf:langString
V K Rajah
rdf:langString
Chan Sek Keong
rdf:langString
Negligence
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Tort
rdf:langString
Duty of care
rdf:langString
Spandeck Engineering v Defence Science and Technology Agency [2007] SGCA 37 was a landmark decision in Singapore law. It established a new framework for establishing a duty of care, differentiating the Singaporean law of tort from past English common law precedent such as Caparo v Dickman and Anns v Merton, whilst also allowing for claims in pure economic loss, which are generally not allowed in English law.
xsd:integer
8
xsd:integer
3
rdf:langString
A duty of care can be established through a two-stage test. First, a prime facie duty of care arises when there is proximity. Two, the prima facie duty can be negated from policy considerations. A threshold of foreseeability exists for the test to be applied.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
11988