Tan Song Gou v Goh Ya Tian
Judgment Date | 19 August 1982 |
Date | 19 August 1982 |
Docket Number | Civil Appeal No 83 of 1981 |
Court | Court of Appeal (Singapore) |
[1982] SGCA 13
Wee Chong Jin CJ
,
T Kulasekaram J
and
A P Rajah J
Civil Appeal No 83 of 1981
Court of Appeal
Evidence–Documentary evidence–Proof of contents–Where maker of police report not available at trial–Admission in police report relied on at trial–Whether sufficient evidence to allow court to make finding on negligence
The plaintiff owned a taxi which he had hired to one Tan Ah Lek (“T”). T was involved in an accident with the first defendant. The first defendant then filed a police report which stated that he had collided into the stationary taxi as a motor crane driven by the second defendant had knocked into his rear and forced him forward. The plaintiff brought an action in negligence against the first and second defendants. At the trial, he relied solely on the police reports filed by T and the first and second defendants, giving their accounts of the accident. He could no longer locate T to give evidence. The defendants submitted no case to answer and elected not to call evidence. The district judge found that there was no case to answer. On appeal to the High Court, the judge allowed the appeal, and found that the plaintiff had proven negligence against both defendants. The first defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Held, dismissing the appeal:
The police report by the first defendant is a documentary statement in which he stated that his pickup collided into the rear of the taxi while the taxi was stationary. This amounted to an admission by the first defendant and was admitted in evidence by agreement of the parties as part of the agreed bundle of documents. By virtue of that admission, the plaintiff had adduced sufficient evidence which would allow the court to come to the conclusion that the damage had been caused by the negligent driving of the first defendant: at [11].
Evidence Act (Cap 5, 1970 Rev Ed) ss 17, 18
Simon Yuen (Khattar, Wong & Partners) for the appellant
Joseph Gay (Leong & Gay) for the respondent.
(delivering the judgment of the court):
1 Goh Ya Tian, the respondent in this appeal, owns a taxi, SH 4490 which he hired to one Tan Ah Lek. On 21 June 1978 the taxi, driven by Tan Ah Lek, was involved in a motor accident. In his police report of the accident Tan Ah Lek said that the taxi was “hit from the rear by Datsun pickup GF 6797 E”.
2 The Datsun pickup was driven by Tan Song Gou, the appellant. In his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Chua Kee Lam (next friend to Chua Peck Seng) v Moksha and Another
... ... evidence before the court (see Press Automation Technology Pte Ltd v Trans-Link Exhibition Forwarding Pte Ltd [2003] 1 SLR 712 at [22], Goh Ya Tian v Tan Song Gou [1980-1981] SLR 578 at 581, [12] and Tan Song Gou v Goh Ya Tian [1982-1983] SLR 107 at 109, [11]). The relevancy of the facts ... ...
-
Epolar System Enterprise Pte Ltd and Others v Lee Hock Chuan and Others
... ... However, Mr. Cheong ... conceded that in recent times, the Court of Appeal had ruled otherwise. In Tan Song Gou ... v Goh Ya Tian [1983] 1 MLJ 60, 62 the opinion of the trial judge was approved by the ... Court of Appeal in the following passage: "We agree ... ...
-
Ng Bee Lian v Fernandez and Another
...(refd) Tan Meng Hua v Singapore Bus Service (1978) LtdMagistrate's Court Suit No 12186 of 1987 (refd) Tan Song Gou v Goh Ya Tian [1981-1982] SLR (R) 584; [1982-1983] SLR 107 (refd) Tan Tee Huat v Loy Sian Wah AnthonyDistrict Court Suit No 4649 of 1987 (refd) Wong Ching Wah v Kang KeithDistr......