Ng Hock Heng v Looi Kok Poh: Negligence Claim for Worsened Injury After Surgery
Ng Hock Heng, a senior foreman, sued Looi Kok Poh and National University Hospital (Singapore) Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, alleging negligence that worsened injuries sustained at work. The Assistant Registrar struck out the claim, but Justice Lee Seiu Kin allowed Ng's appeal, finding that prior compensation under the Workman’s Compensation Act did not necessarily preclude the negligence claim. The court held that the injuries from the surgery may constitute a new cause of action. Both defendants have filed appeals to the Court of Appeal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeals allowed; Assistant Registrar’s order striking out the plaintiff’s pleadings in this suit set aside.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Workman sues doctor and hospital for negligence after surgery worsened his injury. The court allowed the appeal, finding the claim not precluded by prior compensation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National University Hospital (Singapore) Pte Ltd | Defendant, Respondent | Corporation | Application to Strike Out Denied | Lost | |
| Looi Kok Poh | Defendant, Respondent | Individual | Application to Strike Out Denied | Lost | |
| Ng Hock Heng | Plaintiff, Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lee Seiu Kin | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiff was a senior foreman who fell at his workplace on 29 March 2003, sustaining injuries to his left hand and back.
- The plaintiff became a patient of NUH from April 2003 and was treated by the first defendant for his wrist injuries.
- On 17 July 2003, the first defendant carried out a surgical procedure on the plaintiff’s left wrist.
- After the surgery, the plaintiff continued to experience pain in his left arm and was subsequently diagnosed with Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy.
- The plaintiff commenced this suit on 14 July 2006, alleging that the defendants had breached their duty of care to him.
- On 30 August 2004, the plaintiff obtained an award under the Workman’s Compensation Act in the amount of $64,680 from the employer’s insurer.
5. Formal Citations
- Ng Hock Heng v Looi Kok Poh and Another, Suit 453/2006, RA 267/2006, 268/2006, [2007] SGHC 25
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff fell at his place of work and sustained injuries. | |
| Plaintiff became a patient of NUH. | |
| First defendant carried out a surgical procedure on the plaintiff’s left wrist. | |
| Kirschner Wires were removed. | |
| Dr Alphonsus Chong prepared a medical report. | |
| Plaintiff obtained an award under the Workman’s Compensation Act. | |
| Plaintiff commenced this suit. | |
| Applications to strike out taken out by the first and second defendant. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the plaintiff is precluded by s 18(a) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act from recovering damages from the defendants in the present suit as he had already recovered compensation under the Act in respect of the same injuries.
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff is not precluded by s 18(a) from proceeding in this suit.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the compensation award had in fact included compensation for the surgical complications which the plaintiff had suffered.
- Outcome: The court found that this was a factual issue that had to be decided after evaluation of the evidence adduced in the trial.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the statutory bar under s 18(a) did not apply because the injuries to the plaintiff’s radial nerve and EPL tendon were not compensable under the Act.
- Outcome: The court found that, on the assumption that the plaintiff is able to prove his pleaded case, the injury is not compensable under the Act on account of the novus actus interveniens of the defendants.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Special Damages
- General Damages
- Provisional Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Negligence
- Breach of Duty of Care
10. Practice Areas
- Personal Injury
- Medical Malpractice
11. Industries
- Healthcare
- Logistics
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rothwell v Caverswall Stone Co Ltd | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1944] 2 All ER 350 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that negligent treatment by a doctor may constitute a new cause intervening in the chain of causation, such that the incapacity of the workman was not attributable to the industrial accident. |
| Humber Towing Co v Barclay | N/A | Yes | (1911) 5 BWCC 142 | England and Wales | Cited as authority for the principle that negligent treatment by a doctor may constitute a new cause which has intervened in the chain of causation. |
| Rocco v Jones (Stanley) & Co Ltd | N/A | Yes | (1914) 7 BWCC 101 | England and Wales | Cited as authority for the principle that negligent treatment by a doctor may constitute a new cause which has intervened in the chain of causation. |
| Hogan v Bentinck West Hartley Collieries | House of Lords | Yes | [1949] 1 All ER 588 | England and Wales | Cited to affirm the principle that whether a particular intervening act has become the supervening cause of the injury suffered by the workman was a question of fact to be determined by the arbitrator upon all the circumstances of the case. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| O 18 r 19(1)(a) of the Rules of Court (R5, 2006 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Workmen’s Compensation Act (Cap 354, 1998 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Workman’s Compensation Act
- Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy
- Therapeutic Arthroscopy
- Kirschner Wires
- Novus Actus Interveniens
- Informed Consent
15.2 Keywords
- negligence
- workman
- surgery
- compensation
- damages
- workplace injury
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Medical Malpractice | 90 |
| Work Injury Compensation | 80 |
| Informed consent | 75 |
| Personal Injury | 70 |
| Novus Actus Interveniens | 65 |
| Breach of Duty of Care | 60 |
| Therapeutic Arthroscopy | 50 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Compensation and Damages
- Medical Negligence
- Workplace Injury