← All Authorities
Singapore Leading Case penalty clauses and liquidated damages

Mao Xuezhong v Bathurst Resources Ltd

[2016] 4 SLR 346
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore High Court
Year2016
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Singapore High Court adopted the Cavendish/ParkingEye test for penalty clauses, requiring assessment of whether a clause protects a legitimate interest in performance.

Key Principle

penalty clause; Cavendish/ParkingEye test adopted in Singapore; legitimate interest in performance

Area of Law

contract

Related Cases

Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 560

On termination of a building contract, a builder may recover reasonable value of work done in restitution, subject to the contract price as a ceiling where work was performed under a valid contract.

Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2016) 258 CLR 525

Bank late payment fees are not penalties where they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss or protect a legitimate interest of the stipulating party.

Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation (2016) 260 CLR 85

High Court of Australia examined the principles governing rectification of written contracts for common intention and unilateral mistake in equity.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Mao Xuezhong v Bathurst Resources Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Mao Xuezhong v Bathurst Resour...