After close to 4 years of negotiations, the hugely anticipated ASEAN-Hong Kong Free Trade Agreement (AHKFTA) has finally been set in stone. Along with the accompanying ASEAN-Hong Kong Investment Agreement (AHKIA), the two agreements were signed on the sidelines of the 31st ASEAN summit in the Philippines.
The traditional common law position in the field of insurance has always been biased towards the insurer, where insurance doctrines have been “inflexibly applied in favour of insurance companies.” This has been noted in several instances, such as the insured’s duty of non-disclosure, the interpretation of insurance policies, and in the context of fraudulent claims. In the recent UK case of Versloot Dredging v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG (“Versloot”), however, a shift in this attitude can be observed, specifically in regard to fraudulent claims.
The recent Court of Appeal decision in Hii Chii Kok v Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (“Hii Chii Kok”) has been a long time coming. Affirming the demise of the antiquated Bolam-Bolitho test in relation to pre-treatment advice, this decision also adds Singapore to a growing list of countries which have embraced the concept of patient autonomy. This paper will briefly describe the court decisions, before proceeding to an analysis of both the Bolam-Bolitho test, and the new legal test propounded by the Court of Appeal.