Similar fact evidence in contractual interpretation: Bhoomatidevi d/o Kishinchand Chugani Mrs Kavita Gope Mirwani v Nantakumar s/o v Ramachandra and another [2023] SGHC 37

Author

Calvin John Kaiwen CHIRNSIDE, Singapore Management UniversityFollow

Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

acceptedVersion

Publication Date

1-2024

Abstract

In the recent Singapore High Court case of Bhoomatidevi d/o Kishinchand Chugani Mrs Kavita Gope Mirwani v Nantakumar s/o v Ramachandra and another [2023] SGHC 37, the claimant argued, inter alia, that evidence of a prior contract between the first defendant and a third party should be admitted to prove that the defendant had entered into a loan agreement with her in his personal capacity. Justice Lee Seiu Kin dismissed her claim, applying s. 14 of the Evidence Act.

Keywords

contractual interpretation, Indian Evidence Act, similar fact, similar fact evidence, Singapore

Discipline

Asian Studies | Contracts | Evidence

Publication

International Journal of Evidence & Proof

First Page

1

Last Page

6

ISSN

1365-7127

Identifier

10.1177/13657127231225472

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Citation

CHIRNSIDE, Calvin John Kaiwen. Similar fact evidence in contractual interpretation: Bhoomatidevi d/o Kishinchand Chugani Mrs Kavita Gope Mirwani v Nantakumar s/o v Ramachandra and another [2023] SGHC 37. (2024). International Journal of Evidence & Proof. 1-6.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4388

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127231225472