BNM v National University of Singapore: Negligence Claim for Drowning at NUS Swimming Pool

BNM, the administratrix of the estate of B, sued the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Hydro Aquatic Swimming School (Hydro) for negligence after B drowned in NUS's swimming pool. The Court of Appeal of Singapore dismissed both BNM's appeal and NUS's cross-appeal, finding that while the lifeguards were negligent, their negligence was not the cause of B's death. The court also found that Hydro was an independent contractor.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Both appeals dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Negligence claim against NUS and Hydro for a drowning at NUS. The court dismissed the claim, finding no causation between the lifeguards' negligence and the death.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
National University of SingaporeRespondent, AppellantStatutory BoardCross-Appeal DismissedWon
BNM (administratrix of the estate of B, deceased) on her own behalf and on behalf of othersAppellant, RespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Hydro Aquatic Swimming SchoolRespondentCorporationClaim DismissedWon
The Overseas Assurance Corporation LimitedRespondentCorporationClaim DismissedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sundaresh MenonChief JusticeNo
Chao Hick TinJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Steven ChongJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Anparasan s/o KamachiKhattarWong LLP
Tan Hui Ying GraceKhattarWong LLP
Audrey WongKhattarWong LLP
Beh Eng SiewLee Bon Leong & Co
Suja SasidharanLee Bon Leong & Co
Allagarsamy s/o PalaniyappanAllagarsamy & Co
Michael Eu Hai MengUnited Legal Alliance LLC
Francis ChanUnited Legal Alliance LLC

4. Facts

  1. The Deceased drowned in the swimming pool at the Sports and Recreation Centre of NUS.
  2. Hydro was engaged by NUS to supply lifeguards and provide maintenance services for the pool.
  3. The lifeguards were not surveying the pool effectively and only became aware of the Deceased’s difficulties when they heard Er’s shout for help.
  4. The Deceased had an underlying heart condition.
  5. The lifeguards were not trained in the use of AED or Oxyviva.
  6. CPR alone would not have been sufficient to save the Deceased given his underlying heart condition.

5. Formal Citations

  1. BNM (administratrix of the estate of B, deceased) on her own behalf and on behalf of others v National University of Singapore and others and another appeal, Civil Appeals Nos 21 and 22 of 2014, [2014] SGCA 49

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Deceased drowned in NUS swimming pool.
NUS held a meeting with Hydro to review safety conditions at the pool.
Cheong gave a statement to the police.
Plaintiff sent a Letter of Demand to NUS.
Judgment reserved.
Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Causation
    • Outcome: The court found that the negligence of the lifeguards was not causative of the loss.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Duty of Care
    • Outcome: The court found that NUS owed a duty of care to provide properly trained lifeguards but that the duty did not extend to providing lifeguards trained in the use of Oxyviva and AED.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Vicarious Liability
    • Outcome: The court found that Hydro was an independent contractor and that NUS was not vicariously liable for the negligence of Hydro.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Negligence of Lifeguards
    • Outcome: The court found that the lifeguards were negligent in the performance of their duties as they were not surveying the pool as they should have been doing.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Personal Injury
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Education
  • Recreation

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Coggins and GriffithHouse of LordsYes[1947] AC 1England and WalesCited to determine vicarious liability based on control over the negligent party.
Performing Right Society, Limited v Mitchell and Booker (Palais de Danse), LimitedKing's Bench DivisionYes[1924] 1 KB 762England and WalesCited for the control test in determining whether a contractor is an independent contractor.
Argent v Minister of Social Security and AnotherN/AYes[1968] 1 WLR 1749N/ACited to show that the control test is not the only test for determining whether a contractor is an independent contractor.
Market Investigations Ltd v Minister of Social SecurityN/AYes[1969] 2 QB 173N/ACited for the fundamental test of whether the contractor was performing services as a person of business on his own account.
Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung and AnotherPrivy CouncilYes[1990] 2 AC 374N/ACited to endorse the test in Market Investigations Ltd v Minister of Social Security.
Kureoka Enterprise Pte Ltd v Central Provident Fund BoardHigh Court of SingaporeYes[1992] SGHC 113SingaporeCited for local application of the test in Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung and Another.
Anne Teresa Hanlon or Gallacher v City of Glasgow District CouncilN/AYes(1983) Inner House Cases 122N/ACited regarding the time taken for a lifeguard to notice a swimmer in difficulty.
S v Chipinge Rural CouncilN/AYes1988 (2) ZLR 275 (S)N/ACited for the principle that lifeguards cannot be expected to keep an eye on every swimmer every minute.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Drowning
  • Negligence
  • Lifeguard
  • Duty of Care
  • Causation
  • Independent Contractor
  • Vicarious Liability
  • AED
  • Oxyviva
  • CPR

15.2 Keywords

  • drowning
  • negligence
  • lifeguard
  • NUS
  • swimming pool
  • Hydro Aquatic
  • causation
  • independent contractor

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Causation95
Negligence90
Lifeguard Negligence85
Breach of Duty of Care80
Swimming Pool Safety75
Personal Injury70
Vicarious liability60
Contract Law30
Contracts30
Civil Procedure20
Measure of Damages20

16. Subjects

  • Tort
  • Negligence
  • Contract
  • Personal Injury