SG court orders man to pay his neighbour S$10K after losing lawsuit over alleged assault, battery, and harassment - Singapore News
· The IndependentSINGAPORE: A Singapore court has dismissed a man’s lawsuit against his neighbour after finding there was no evidence to support claims of assault, battery and harassment.
The case centred on a long-running dispute between neighbours living along the same corridor at Block 633 Pasir Ris Drive 3. The claimant, Mr Mah Kiat Seng, had sought about S$40,000 in damages over three separate incidents between July 2024 and May 2025.
The court, however, ruled against him and ordered him to pay S$10,000 in legal costs to his neighbour instead.
According to a judgment published on June 17, District Judge Chiah Kok Khun found that Mr Mah failed to prove his claims on a balance of probabilities. Channel NewsAsia (CNA) reported that the judge found no independent evidence supporting the allegations.
Lack of evidence proved fatal to the claim
Mah alleged that the first incident occurred in July 2024 near the shared rubbish chute outside the lift lobby. He claimed his neighbour’s father had scolded him for making noise while walking in slippers. He also alleged that his neighbour became aggressive, rushed towards him and grabbed his hand, causing pain.
The court found no witnesses, photographs, medical records or other independent evidence to support those claims. Judge Chiah said the court was left only with Mah’s version of events. Without supporting proof, the allegations couldn’t be established.
The judge reached a similar conclusion regarding two later incidents in March and May 2025, where Mah accused his neighbour of harassment.
CCTV footage and records supported the neighbour’s account
The neighbour presented a very different version of events and backed it up with evidence. For the July 2024 dispute, he said he had returned home after taking his dog outside and denied threatening or physically attacking Mah.
The neighbour told the court that an argument took place, but said he never grabbed or charged at his neighbour.
The judge also noted that a private summons previously filed by Mah over the same incident had been withdrawn after intervention by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.
For the March 2025 incident, the neighbour produced CCTV footage and phone records showing he was caring for an injured stray cat and speaking with the National Parks Board (NParks) when the disagreement occurred.
The footage showed him carrying food for the cat, supporting his explanation that he was following the animal rather than confronting Mah.
Video evidence contradicted harassment allegations
The final incident in May 2025 revolved around complaints about noise outside the flats. The neighbour said he wanted to speak with Mah to resolve concerns about loud stomping that had disturbed his elderly mother.
CCTV footage showed him walking towards Mah’s flat and returning without any confrontation. The neighbour also provided recordings showing Mah shouting outside the unit.
After reviewing the evidence, the court concluded there was insufficient proof that the neighbour had committed assault, battery or harassment. The lawsuit was dismissed in full, and costs of S$10,000 were awarded to the neighbour.
Evidence speaks louder than allegations
Neighbour disputes are among the most common conflicts in dense urban housing estates, but allegations alone are not enough in court.
Whether the dispute involves harassment, noise complaints or physical confrontations, judges rely on evidence rather than competing personal accounts. CCTV footage, records and independent witnesses can carry more weight than accusations made after the fact.
Documenting incidents properly and seeking practical solutions early may prevent disagreements from escalating into lengthy and costly legal battles for residents facing conflicts with neighbours.
- Advertisement -