← All Authorities
Singapore duty of carepure economic lossquincecare dutyprofessional negligence

Quek Kwee Kee Victoria v American Express Bank Ltd

[2011] SGCA 46
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2011
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A bank owes a duty of care in negligent misstatement under Hedley Byrne principles, with concurrent liability in contract and tort being permissible in Singapore.

Key Principle

bankers duty of care; Hedley Byrne negligent misstatement; concurrent liability

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 Quek Kwee Kee Victoria v American Express Bank Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Quek Kwee Kee Victoria v Ameri...