Extra strokes of cane, Dickson Tan

In 2007 and 2008, the most interesting lawsuit against the government was by Dickson Tan, a teenager who was sentenced to jail and 5 strokes of the cane. By mistake, he was given 8 strokes of the cane. This was due to errors by the Subordinate Courts and the Prisons Department.

The extra strokes constituted battery, which is a wrong (or in legal jargon, a tort) where physical force in inflicted on another person. The government, like any other person, much act within the limits of the law. Unless they can point to a statute or case law that allows them to carry out a otherwise illegal act, they can be sued by anyone who is harmed by their act.

Back to Dickson Tan. He started a lawsuit against the government. He wanted a six figure sum as compensation. However, (in my opinion) it is difficult to justify such a large amount for 3 strokes especially since he was already subject to caning and if no permanent harm was inflicted (Not sure it the last part about harm is accurate since caning of adults leaves permanent scars when the skin is broken). Finally, both parties agreed to mediation by a retired High Court judge. Mediation is a process where an independent party tries to persuade both parties to settle their dispute without having a judge decide who is right and wrong. Part of the mediation settlement might include the payment of some compensation, an apology, etc. In this case, however, the terms of the settlement were kept confidential.

cases - suit against Land Transport Authority

The Land Transport Authority had been facing a problem of inconsiderate cyclists endangering pedestrians by riding at high speed along pedestrian overhead bridges. To curb the problem, it installed cycling barriers to force such cyclists to dismount.

Unfortunately, Mr Koh Liep Hang, who was riding along an overhead bridge at Tampines one night, crashed into the barrier and became paralysed from the waist down. He sued the Land Transport Authority and its contractor who had just installed the barrier but had failed to put up warning signs or ensure adequate notice of the barrier. Later, he dropped the suit against the LTA but proceeded against the contractor. The contractor's insurer later paid $800,000 as damages.

Cases of suits against government

A motorcyclist, Mr Selvanaikam Mathalamuthu, was severely injured at paralysed at the Woodlands Checkpoint abou a year ago. A metal gate under Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) control had suddenly swung open and knocked him off his motorcycle.

The government agreed to pay 70% of his damages which came to $266,000. It should be noted that large personal injury awards in Singapore are no reason to celebrate. Often, the large amounts are needed to pay for medicine and nursing care for the rest of one's life. On the other hand, I personally know of a Singaporean who made over $700,000 suing a US company in a US court for his injuries incurred in an aircrash in Indonesia. He is mobile and seems to be living a normal life.

Suit against Mindef by NS man

A young national serviceman, Jeremy Tan, who was found at the bottom of a block of flats in an army camp won a lawsuit against the Ministry of Defence (Mindef). An investigation failed to reveal the cause of his fall. As a result of this fall, he became unconcious and remains in a coma since the August 2005 incident.

The lawsuit concerned the interpreation of words in certain subsidiary legislation. The SAF (Pensions) Regulations state that a member of the SAF - a regular, a full-time NSman, an operationally ready NSman or volunteer - has the right to a payout for disabilities resulting from 'an injury received in and which is attributable to service'. The issue here case was over the phrase 'attributable to service' and its application to the case. The judge, Justice Tay Yong Kwong, found that the case came within the Regulations. The Regulations would cover anyone on standby and the plaintiff was also on 24 hour duty. Since Mindef lost this proceeding, the next stage would be for the amount of payment to be assessed by the court.

Legal costs against Mindef for all proceedings including a 4 day trial were set at $33,000. Lawyer for the plaintiff was Lau Teik Soon, a former PAP member of parliament who after a long career as a university lecturer qualified as a lawyer.

Many legal proceedings, like this one, are divided into 2 parts - with the court deciding on liability in the first part, and then quantum in the second part. "Liability" refers to whether on the facts and the law, the defendant is responsible to the Plaintiff for breach of contract, negligence, etc. If liability is found, then the court moves to the next stage to determine the amount of compensation (or quantum) that can be claimed.