A driver of a car accident who was a passenger in a food delivery truck was sued for damages, but it was revealed during the reading that he had not paid income tax and had not disclosed his money to the government.
The vehicle’s lawyers used this against the horse in quarrels, with the judge calling the discovery” surprising” but not crucial in the passenger’s state.
According to a judgment by a magistrate’s court made available on Monday ( Aug 26 ), the damages awarded to Mr Mohamed Akbar Ibrahim came out to about S$ 6, 000 ( US$ 4, 600 ).
Because that is the portion of the total prize quantity that was determined to be in Mr. Akbar’s favor, this is 30 % of the full award amount.  ,
The S$ 6, 000 includes damages for pain and suffering for Mr Akbar’s damaged head and thumb and many scratches.
THE Event
Mr Akbar, a 60-year-old person, was thrown off his bicycle after a collision with accused Tan Geok Yee’s vehicles on Aug 16, 2022.
Mr. Akbar sprained his left thumb and appropriate neck, which were both abrasive. He received an initial 14 days ‘ medical left, a recommendation to the orthopedic outpatient specialist clinic, and was seen by Changi General Hospital’s emergency department.
After receiving treatment, he was referred to the division of orthopedic surgery for his finger, and he received another 45 days of health leave in total.
He later regained full movement in his finger and shoulder, and a permanent impairment is not anticipated.
Mr. Akbar resumed employment as a food delivery motorcyclist on September 5, 2022 after a 20-day rest period.
Despite receiving a full of 59 days of skilled left, this was done. He was forced to do it to support his family, but because of this, he simply claimed pre-trial loss of income for the 18 weeks of unpaid medical leave.
Mr Akbar sought problems of S$ 6, 358, including problems for his injury, medical costs and transportation costs, while the respondent said it should only be about S$ 3, 891.
For his pre-trial loss of income, or the amount of money he lost because he could never work due to the injury caused, Mr Akbar used a number of S$ 180 a day for 18 weeks.
The plaintiff’s lawyers, Mr Richard Tan and Mr Calvin Tan from Tan Chin Hoe &, Co, said this should be S$ 84.29 a time instead.
Mr. Akbar had immediately claimed that during his 18 days off-duty health left, he had lost S$ 4, 243.14.
He provided weekly earnings statements from Grab Holdings Inc. that showed his money as a horse for food delivery from Jun 26 through November 20 in 2022.
The defendant’s lawyers, however, put it to him at trial that the figure just represented his ordinary daily total income and not his ordinary regular net income.
Mr. Akbar agreed and claimed that the typical net income after bills would be around S$ 180 per day. He finally revised his state downwards.
CROSS-EXAMINATION ON IMPLICATION OF INCOME TO IRAS
Mr. Akbar’s attorney interrogated the defendant for not reporting his income to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore ( IRAS ).
On questioning, Mr Akbar said:” I have always paid income tax. I do n’t report because I do n’t have any of the CPF ( Central Provident Fund ) that I do.
He also acknowledged that he had to record his money to IRAS, but that he had never done so.
He claimed that this was because” I’m a worker on a daily basis and do n’t have any CPF.”
If a worker’s total monthly income falls below S$ 22,000, they must pay income tax, but Mr. Akbar claimed he was unaware of this.
The plaintiff’s attorney argued using this evidence that Mr. Akbar’s daily average gross income of S$ 235.73 cannot be accepted because it would result in a gross annual income of more than S$ 61,500, which is incorrect because Mr. Akbar did not pay any income tax in 2022.
Mr Akbar’s solicitor, Mr Anthony Chey from Island Law Practice, rejected this argument, saying that any failure to report his money or to give his income taxes was between Mr Akbar and IRAS.
Although Mr. Akbar had chosen to not report his income and pay income taxes, there was imperative supporting documentation in the form of Grab’s weekly income statements, according to District Judge Andre Sim Jun Yi.
In these instances, he was prepared to accept the common total income number of S$ 235.73 per day Mr Akbar put forward. However, the number could not be used as it did not account for his charges.
Judge Sim called the state of the proof” somewhat unfortunate,” but added that it was also obvious that Mr. Akbar had suffered” some reduction that ought to be compensated for effectively, even if it cannot be compensated for perfectly.”
He applied a “discount of 50 per share for charges” given the limited data and used an average gross income number of S$ 117.87 per day for his calculations.
As for the alleged tax evasion, the prosecutor said:” Contrary to the plaintiff’s distribution, this getting does no aid the plaintiff in’ defrauding the government ‘. The matter before me only concerns the Claimant’s state for pre-trial reduction of income, and that is what I have adjudged”.
He said any “alleged non-compliance with tax laws is a problem for the appropriate authorities to check, if they deem required”.
Mr Akbar was so awarded S$ 5, 932.55 in restitution, with interest.