Implication Of Pre-Action Settlement Offers By Insurer Clients

In the personal injuries case of Ku Suet Yu Amy v. JV Fitness Ltd (HCPI No. 266 of 2015, Judgment on 5 February 2016), the defendant invited the Court to invoke the otherwise proviso provided under Order 22 Rule 20(1) of the Rules of High Court, and ordered costs against the plaintiff who accepted a Sanctioned Payment after the commencement of proceedings which is the same as the offer made by the defendant's insurer in the pre-action stage. The Court of First Instance demonstrated its approach in exercising its discretion provided under Order 22 Rule 20(1) of the Rules of High Court.

Background

The Plaintiff, a lawful visitor of a fitness centre operated by the Defendant, slipped, and fell, while walking towards the shower room area of the said fitness centre, leading to injuries in the left wrist.