← All Authorities
Singapore duty of caremisrepresentation

Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd

[2016] SGCA 47
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2016
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Applying the Spandeck two-stage test, the Court of Appeal considered the duty of care owed in pre-contractual negotiations and claims of misrepresentation.

Key Principle

misrepresentation; duty of care in pre-contractual negotiations; Spandeck applied

Area of Law

tort

Related Cases

Bird v DP (A Pseudonym) (2024) 98 ALJR 486

High Court of Australia held a religious organisation vicariously liable for sexual abuse by a priest, recognising a relationship akin to employment sufficient to ground vicarious liability.

Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd (2023) 278 CLR 99

High Court of Australia held that the peak indebtedness rule does not apply when assessing unfair preferences under s 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Kozarov v Victoria (2022) 275 CLR 115

An employer owes a duty to take reasonable steps to protect an employee from psychiatric injury caused by vicarious trauma, and may breach that duty by failing to act on obvious warning signs.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life...