Negligence case - Robertson Quay v Steen Consultants

The 2008 Court of Appeal case of Robertson Quay Investment Pte Ltd v Steen Consultants Pte Ltd was an interesting case not on complicated issues of negligence but on the issue of loss.

Here, Steen Consultants were employed by Robertson Quay to provide civil and structural engineering services for the construction of the Gallery Hotel. However,Steen Consultants made a blunder - they submitted an old set of structural drawings to the building contractor instead of the latest updated set. As a result, there was a delay of 101 days in the completion of construction of the Hotel.

Steen Consultants admitted their legal responsibility and in court, it was only up to Robertson Quay to prove their loss. The latter made claims for management fees, consulting fees, staff salaries and interest on shareholders' loans during the delay period.

A major problem was that the latter was not able to prove that the interest expense incurred during the delay period was not proven in court. The court held that Robertson Quay should have showed that if there was no error by Steen Consultants, then the interest expense would not have been incurred.

This issue of causation is often overlooked by claimants. It is not enough to show that you incurred some costs. You must show that if there was no professional negligence, this cost would not have been incurred and therefore the defendant is responsible for this loss.