Singapore
Mind the hump: Fall at Singapore void deck sparks lawsuit — but court says man bears most of the blame
Block 542 Hougang Avenue 8, where a man tripped over a concrete hump during upgrading works. — Picture via Google Maps

SINGAPORE, March 13 — A man who sued a contractor after tripping over a concrete hump at a Hougang void deck has been found largely responsible for his own fall, a Singapore court has ruled.

According to The Straits Times, District Judge Sia Aik Kor apportioned 75 per cent of the blame to Choo Mee Hua and 25 per cent to contractor HPC Builders in a judgment delivered on March 11.

Choo was leaving a wake on the morning of March 14, 2023 when he tripped over the hump at the void deck of Block 542 Hougang Avenue 8, where upgrading works were under way.

The fall left him with injuries to his face, hand and shoulder, and damaged his watch and phone, which were flung from his hands.

The hump — about 20cm high and painted yellow — had been built over a sewerage manhole and connected to a 16cm-high pipe leading from temporary toilets installed during the upgrading works.

Judge Sia noted the incident occurred in broad daylight and said Choo should have been alert to hazards.

“The claimant should have already been aware that there were temporary toilets in the area and that the block was having upgrading works.

“He should therefore have been more alert to the possibility of hazards as he emerged from the passageway.”

The judge also questioned Choo’s credibility, pointing to inconsistencies in his account — including whether he drove to the wake or was dropped off, when he made a police report, and whether he tripped over the pipe or the concrete hump.

“I find this evidence to be incredible and totally lacking in credibility, given the set-up in the area,” she said.

Still, the court found that HPC Builders had breached its duty of care, noting the hump created an unexpected change in walkway level that could cause someone to trip.

Judge Sia said the area should have been cordoned off from public access because of the hazard.

A further hearing will determine the remaining issues, including damages.

 

Related Articles

 

You May Also Like