• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Court Stops Frivolous Suit By Dead NSF's Family To Extract More Money From SAF!

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Joined
Oct 30, 2014
Messages
36,768
Points
113
Photo-from-Dominique-Lees-family-e1457008684880.jpg


Despite having found breaching safety regulations, the Singapore High Court ruled that the family of the deceased National Serviceman (NSF), Private Dominique Sarron Lee, will not be allowed to sue the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) for negligence.

On 17 April, 2012, Pte. Dominque Lee collapsed after suffering breathing difficulties from the six smoke grenades used in the exercise. A Committee of Inquiry (COI) in 2012 delivered their judgment confirming that the SAF breached safety regulations because only a maximum of two smoke grenades were allowed to be used in the exercise. A state coroner’s inquiry in Aug 2013 later confirmed that Pte. Dominque died from inhaling the smoke in the smoke grenades.

Judicial Commissioner Kannan Ramesh dismissed the family’s argument that there was a contract between SAF and Pte Lee and so, his family was entitled to claim damages from SAF for breaching its contractual duty to ensure the highest standards of training safety.

According to a statement by the Ministry of Defence (Mindef), the family of the deceased serviceman received a lump sum death gratuity, equivalent to 12 months of the last drawn monthly gross salary of a regular of equivalent rank. A regular with a private rank is estimated to earn around S$2,000 a month. Although undisclosed, the compensation for Dominique’s death the family got is estimated to be around S$60,000 after factoring a “special award” which doubles the compensation amount in the event the death happened during training.

http://statestimesreview.com/2016/0...not-allowed-to-sue-saf-despite-safety-breach/
 
Photo-from-Dominique-Lees-family-e1457008684880.jpg


Despite having found breaching safety regulations, the Singapore High Court ruled that the family of the deceased National Serviceman (NSF), Private Dominique Sarron Lee, will not be allowed to sue the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) for negligence.

On 17 April, 2012, Pte. Dominque Lee collapsed after suffering breathing difficulties from the six smoke grenades used in the exercise. A Committee of Inquiry (COI) in 2012 delivered their judgment confirming that the SAF breached safety regulations because only a maximum of two smoke grenades were allowed to be used in the exercise. A state coroner’s inquiry in Aug 2013 later confirmed that Pte. Dominque died from inhaling the smoke in the smoke grenades.

Judicial Commissioner Kannan Ramesh dismissed the family’s argument that there was a contract between SAF and Pte Lee and so, his family was entitled to claim damages from SAF for breaching its contractual duty to ensure the highest standards of training safety.

According to a statement by the Ministry of Defence (Mindef), the family of the deceased serviceman received a lump sum death gratuity, equivalent to 12 months of the last drawn monthly gross salary of a regular of equivalent rank. A regular with a private rank is estimated to earn around S$2,000 a month. Although undisclosed, the compensation for Dominique’s death the family got is estimated to be around S$60,000 after factoring a “special award” which doubles the compensation amount in the event the death happened during training.

http://statestimesreview.com/2016/0...not-allowed-to-sue-saf-despite-safety-breach/


You could imagine the pain and hurt the parents have to go through.
Trusting the Government to ensure the safety of their son during National Service
only to realized that the Government breached their trust but only treat their son
like some cheap human being whose life is only worth a derisory sum of S$60K.

Even when the SAF is guilty of safety breach, the Government denies them to right to sue the SAF for negligence. If the deceased were to be one of the Minister's son, I am sure heads are going to roll in the SAF.

Never trust the PAP Government with your son's life and never vote for them ever.
 
Not allowed to sue?u mean we cant even wayang to sue in court?u mean got money also cant even try to sue to extract our pound of flesh?what a amazing judiciary system,who wrote the laws in singapore?how about not suing for monetary settlement,im a billionaire and I want to sue saf to accept responsibility.I want saf generals to kowtow and acknowledge and accept responsibility,I want them to annouce in newspaper big big they accept blame.is that even allowed?
 
If one day I become billionaire and set up business relations with saf and glcs,im going to squeeze their balls hard,im going to overcharge them hundreds of millions and give all the profits I made to all the ns men who has been wronged or killed by saf.
 
The courts are there to protect the establishment.

That's why the CI on Benjamin is going to be just wayang.
 
Can the Thais & Burmese sue their junta overlords? If they can't, why do you think sinkies can sue the PAP junta?

Lazy & daft male sinkies must be taught a lesson to know their place under the heavens - dispensable conscripts for the white junta.
 
If one day I become billionaire and set up business relations with saf and glcs,im going to squeeze their balls hard,im going to overcharge them hundreds of millions and give all the profits I made to all the ns men who has been wronged or killed by saf.

That won't happen, you sinkie loser. You will remain poor.
 
Back in the mid to late 80s, 4 armed robbers were caned way way beyond
the max pemitted by law. That is, 24 strokes at one go.

2 were caned 48 strokes and the other 2, 36 strokes. The supt of prisons called the DJ on day of caning to verify what he knew was an error. The motherfucker DJ, now living in Perth, insisted he was right.

The caning took place with 48 strokes for 2 and 36 for the other 2. None screamed. Fucking room was flooded with blood. All 4 had to be carried out.

After their release, family of one if the chap caned 48 strokes engaged a lawyer to sue. It never made the news and was settled for 70k i think. Max 80k. This guy got his nick after his 48 strokes. He is see chap puayk chong i think. The 3 others had no money. Family couldnt engage lawyers.

when the govt realised error was made, why settle just 1 when other 3 were also victims. They kept quiet and pretended nothing took place.

that is the govt 70% voted for. Senior lawyers are aware of this case. Similarly the older generation of jiang hu people.

please dont ask for proof.
 
Back in the mid to late 80s, 4 armed robbers were caned way way beyond
the max pemitted by law. That is, 24 strokes at one go.

2 were caned 48 strokes and the other 2, 36 strokes. The supt of prisons called the DJ on day of caning to verify what he knew was an error. The motherfucker DJ, now living in Perth, insisted he was right.

The caning took place with 48 strokes for 2 and 36 for the other 2. None screamed. Fucking room was flooded with blood. All 4 had to be carried out.

After their release, family of one if the chap caned 48 strokes engaged a lawyer to sue. It never made the news and was settled for 70k i think. Max 80k. This guy got his nick after his 48 strokes. He is see chap puayk chong i think. The 3 others had no money. Family couldnt engage lawyers.

when the govt realised error was made, why settle just 1 when other 3 were also victims. They kept quiet and pretended nothing took place.

that is the govt 70% voted for. Senior lawyers are aware of this case. Similarly the older generation of jiang hu people.

please dont ask for proof.

Thanks for the enlightenment GD.
Without your valuable contribution and insight in this forum many Singaporeans would still be in the 70% camp brainwashed by the 154 half-truth "hear the right thing" State Media.
Please continue to contribute and enlighten the masses.
Good Deed Good Karma. :)
 
Thanks for the enlightenment GD.
Without your valuable contribution and insight in this forum many Singaporeans would still be in the 70% camp brainwashed by the 154 half-truth "hear the right thing" State Media.
Please continue to contribute and enlighten the masses.
Good Deed Good Karma. :)

thanks bro. that is why i m here in this forum. lucky me you didnt ask for evidence! hahaha. just kidding.

this case was discussed in parliament when a teenager was caned additional strokes for ah long offences i think.

the great jayajumar, then law and home affairs minister was right. he said a prisoner can be caned more than 24 strokes. i fully agree. why?
because when he is serving time for several offences he gets 24 strokes. after his release, commit more crimes. sentenced again n 24 strokes. possible. happened to many. but more than 24 at one go? that is wrong.

why it took place? the 4 faced several charges. For instance, one of them had 4 charges and sentenced to x number of months and x number of strokes. but 2 of the sentences were concurrent not consecutive. whatever the confusion, the district judge should know better than to instruct supt of prison to carry out all 48 and 36 strokes at one go. silly supt of prison should have alerted his director of prison but he failed.

wrong was done. cant turn back the clock. i understand. but why compensate the guy whose family could afford a lawyer and not other 3?

is this the govt our 70% want? penalise the poor? whatever wrong the other 3 committed, they were already punished.
 
Judicial Commissioner Kannan Ramesh dismissed the family’s argument that there was a contract between SAF and Pte Lee and so, his family was entitled to claim damages from SAF for breaching its contractual duty to ensure the highest standards of training safety.

In a real democracy, other lawyers will critique the decision. Not in sinkapore. Lawyers just accept the stupidity of our judges.
Will this Ah Neh judge explain why he dismissed that the SAF has no contractual duty to ensure safety of the soldiers?

All parents should not allow their son do NS until this is clarified.
 
Back in the mid to late 80s, 4 armed robbers were caned way way beyond
the max pemitted by law. That is, 24 strokes at one go.

2 were caned 48 strokes and the other 2, 36 strokes. The supt of prisons called the DJ on day of caning to verify what he knew was an error. The motherfucker DJ, now living in Perth, insisted he was right.

The caning took place with 48 strokes for 2 and 36 for the other 2. None screamed. Fucking room was flooded with blood. All 4 had to be carried out.

After their release, family of one if the chap caned 48 strokes engaged a lawyer to sue. It never made the news and was settled for 70k i think. Max 80k. This guy got his nick after his 48 strokes. He is see chap puayk chong i think. The 3 others had no money. Family couldnt engage lawyers.

when the govt realised error was made, why settle just 1 when other 3 were also victims. They kept quiet and pretended nothing took place.

that is the govt 70% voted for. Senior lawyers are aware of this case. Similarly the older generation of jiang hu people.

please dont ask for proof.

At least in ur case study,the victim was allowed to sue the government and seek restitution.70k was also good money in the 70s.now in this case the laws have been patched,saf and PAP government has been elevated to kim jong il regime status.the courts have already decided pretrial that saf is completely blameless and guilt free no matter what happens and can not be sued,justice do not apply to saf,they are above and beyond the law and beyond reproach of any power of any kind mortal or godlike.
 
SAF core value= care for soldiers: U joking here when PAP statutes absolve SAF from liability for negligence???!!!

Care for Soldiers
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mi...gs/saftimi/units/cld/keyideas/corevalues.html
Care for Soldiers is the genuine concern that we have for the well-being of our fellow soldiers and those in our command. This includes a personal touch, proper equipping, feeding, training and providing adequate rest both in peacetime and in war. It is training soldiers so well that they can protect themselves and survive in battle. This is the philosophy of more sweat in peacetime and less blood in war.Care is absolutely essential for cohesion, team spirit and ultimately combat effectiveness. Commanders who care for the training, morale and discipline of their troops can be sure they have a fighting fit force at hand. They can also be sure of their loyalty. Care for soldiers also extends to the families of the soldiers

SAF core value= care for soldiers: U joking here when PAP statutes absolve SAF from liability for negligence???!!! According to what parliament legislated, that seems to be just LIP SERVICE to deceive NSmen, unless the learned judge made a wrong interpretation of the law:... But by the looks of it, parliament seems to be the one who has scammed (short-changed) NSmen:

MTy8nOC.jpg
[Letter to Today] NS a duty, not a job — thus no ‘salary’: Mindef

Proof that the average PAP parliamentarian is just a ball sucking henchman out to campaign for higher ministerial salaries and get some s¢raps perhaps in return:
"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity."
- MP Lim Wee Kiak apologises for comments on pay
YqUYU.jpg
[IMG URL]

GRC:
The real purpose is to help PAP exco fill up parliamentary seats with more ball suckers to ram rod every PAP policy through:
'Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].
Intoparliamentjpg.jpg
[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]]


They already admitted that fixing opposition parties was considered 'fair play'.

Even the AGC seems to be their part time legal counsel (especially during election time) too:
TO9hNRql.jpg
(Pict source)

The real truth about how elietist PAP is treating the average/ poor Singaporean:
wsm.jpg
Wee Shu Min elitism controversy

PAP should just be honest that their true policy position of NS is that it is= SLAVERY.
 
Last edited:
In a real democracy, other lawyers will critique the decision. Not in sinkapore. Lawyers just accept the stupidity of our judges.
Will this Ah Neh judge explain why he dismissed that the SAF has no contractual duty to ensure safety of the soldiers?

All parents should not allow their son do NS until this is clarified.

Any kind lawyer out there..???

Can petition to have this error redress..??

Surley the chief Justice duty is to uphold the law and made redress..otherwise the meaning of credibility and integrity is meaningless..

Time to make Shamunggam to work hard as he is the law minister...to uphold his integrity and the judicial system.
 
Any kind lawyer out there..???

Can petition to have this error redress..??

Surley the chief Justice duty is to uphold the law and made redress..otherwise the meaning of credibility and integrity is
meaningless..

Time to make Shamunggam to work hard as he is the law minister...to uphold his integrity and the judicial system.

Tough. Most lawyers wanna make money and avoid being on the opposite side. I am sure some will mention Ravi but he is not the right chsp for this type of cases.
 
You could imagine the pain and hurt the parents have to go through.
Trusting the Government to ensure the safety of their son during National Service
only to realized that the Government breached their trust but only treat their son
like some cheap human being whose life is only worth a derisory sum of S$60K.

Even when the SAF is guilty of safety breach, the Government denies them to right to sue the SAF for negligence. If the deceased were to be one of the Minister's son, I am sure heads are going to roll in the SAF.

Never trust the PAP Government with your son's life and never vote for them ever.

$60,000 is an insult to a NS Boy who has died in the service of his country. The fucking PAP let in FTs students his age with free scholarships to unis and secondary/pre-u schools that are worth more then that. as well, able bodied young FTs becoming SPRs can buy and make money from HDB flats without having to serve NS, and that is also worth more than $60K in their pockets. Truly traitorous PAP.
 
Singapore gahmen must come clean and explain in simple English Ch121: Government proceedings Act, section 14 just like there are so many advertisements on TV about Medishield-life:

Provisions relating to the armed forces
14.—(1) Nothing done or omitted to be done by a member of the forces while on duty as such shall subject either him or the Government to liability in tort for causing the death of another person, or for causing personal injury to another person, in so far as the death or personal injury is due to anything suffered by that other person while he is a member of the forces if —
(a)
at the time when the thing is suffered by that other person, he is —
(i)
on duty as a member of the forces; or
(ii)
though not on duty as a member of the forces —
(A)
on any land, premises, ship, aircraft or vehicle for the time being used for the purposes of the forces; or
(B)
on any journey necessary to enable him to report for duty as such or to return home after such duty; and
[Act 45/96 wef 28/12/1996]
(b)
the Minister responsible for finance certifies that his suffering that thing has been or will be treated as attributable to service for the purposes of entitlement to an award under any written law relating to the disablement or death of members of the force of which he is a member:
Provided that this subsection shall not exempt a member of the forces from liability in tort in any case in which the court is satisfied that the act or omission was not connected with the execution of his duties as a member of the forces.
(2) No proceedings in tort shall lie against the Government for death or personal injury due to anything suffered by a member of the forces if —
(a)
that thing is suffered by him in consequence of the nature or condition of any such land, premises, ship, aircraft or vehicle as aforesaid, or in consequence of the nature or condition of any equipment or supplies used for the purposes of the forces; and
(b)
the Minister responsible for finance certifies as mentioned in subsection (1),
nor shall any act or omission of an officer of the Government subject him to liability in tort for death or personal injury, in so far as the death or personal injury is due to anything suffered by a member of the forces being a thing as to which the conditions aforesaid are satisfied.
(3) The Minister charged with the responsibility for defence or internal security, as the case may be, if satisfied that it is the fact —
(a)
that a person was or was not on any particular occasion on duty as a member of the forces;
(aa)
that a person was or was not on any particular occasion either on any journey necessary to enable him to report for duty as such or to return home after such duty; or
[Act 45/96 wef 28/12/1996]
(b)
that at any particular time any land, premises, ship, aircraft, vehicle, equipment or supplies was or was not, or were or were not, used for the purposes of the forces,
may issue a certificate certifying that to be the fact; and any such certificate shall, for the purposes of this section, be conclusive as to the fact which it certifies.
(4) No act or omission of a public officer shall subject him to liability in tort for death or personal injury, in so far as the death or personal injury is due to anything suffered by a member of the forces being a thing as to which the conditions mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) are satisfied.
(5) In this section —
“armed forces” means the Singapore Armed Forces raised and maintained under the Singapore Armed Forces Act [Cap. 295];
“forces” includes the armed forces and the police force; and
“police force” means the Singapore Police Force established under the Police Force Act [Cap. 235] and includes any volunteer, auxiliary or special police force attached to, or coming under the jurisdiction of, the Police Force.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/sear...03a-6d29f9e8c4af Depth:0 Status:inforce;rec=0
 
In a real democracy, other lawyers will critique the decision. Not in sinkapore. Lawyers just accept the stupidity of our judges.
Will this Ah Neh judge explain why he dismissed that the SAF has no contractual duty to ensure safety of the soldiers?

All parents should not allow their son do NS until this is clarified.

SAF has a contractual duty to only promote Scholars rapidly to the rank of General. That is their main goal. the other contract is to run NDP. Other then that, you die, your business. Parents should make all their boys stay at home and don't report to camp. There is no space in DBs for thousands of NSmen.
 
Back
Top