← All Authorities
Singapore lawful means conspiracyunlawful means conspiracy

Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming Eric

[2007] 3 SLR(R) 782
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2007
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Singapore Court of Appeal applied the predominant purpose test to distinguish lawful means conspiracy from unlawful means conspiracy in the tort of conspiracy to injure.

Key Principle

conspiracy; lawful and unlawful means; tort of conspiracy to injure; predominant purpose test

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 Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming Eric and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte ...