← All Authorities
Singapore Leading Case unconscionability

BOM v BOK

[2019] SGCA 9
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2019
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Unconscionability is an independent vitiating factor in Singapore, requiring a transaction at undervalue and exploitation of the plaintiff's weakness, not limited to traditional vulnerability categories.

Key Principle

Unconscionability doctrine in Singapore: independent vitiating factor. Transaction at undervalue + weakness exploited. Not limited to traditional categories of vulnerability.

Area of Law

equity

Related Cases

Australian Financial Services and Leasing Pty Ltd v Hills Industries Ltd (2014) 253 CLR 560

Change of position is a defence to a claim in unjust enrichment for mistaken payments where the defendant has detrimentally relied on the receipt.

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton (2012) 246 CLR 498

Unjust enrichment claims for money paid under illegal contracts may succeed if recovery is consistent with the statutory policy underlying the illegality.

Friend v Brooker (2009) 239 CLR 129

Equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty does not require but-for causation, and a fiduciary must account for profits made in breach of their stringent obligations.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of BOM v BOK and how it applies to your situation.

Explain BOM v BOK