[1997] SGHC 77

In the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

[1997] SGHC 77

Suit 807/1995

Between

Singgulf Pte Ltd

… Plaintiff

And

The Great Eastern Life Assurance Co Ltd

… Defendant

grounds of decision

This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports.

Singgulf Pte Ltd v The Great Eastern Life Assurance Co Ltd

[1997] SGHC 77

Suit 807/1995
Choo Han Teck JC
27 March 1997

1
Judgment:

2 GROUNDS OF DECISION

27 25. If the Plaintiffs failed to seek legal advice when they had ample time to do so, it

is indeed their own folly. If they had sought legal advice and were advised to pay up,

then their recourse is against the solicitors if that advice was negligently given. If

they were advised that they were not obliged to pay but elected to do so nonetheless, then

they cannot cry duress subsequently. A mere statement in August 1989 by their then

solicitors that they were forwarding the cheque for rent without prejudice is of no

assistance to the Plaintiffs. The facts here, therefore, differ materially from that in

Maskell v Horner < 1915 > 3 KB 106 which was relied upon by counsel for the

Plaintiffs.

29 27. The Plaintiffs' claim is, accordingly, dismissed with costs.

30 - Sgd - Choo Han Teck

31 Judicial Commissioner

Choo Han Teck JC

Kok Mun Loon [Charles N Mendis & Partners] for the plaintiffs
Morris John and Kelvin Tan [Drew & Napier] for the defendants