Singapore - Time Bars
A limitation period is the time within which claimants have to commence legal proceedings, either in court or arbitration, otherwise those claims will become time barred.
In Singapore, relevant limitation periods for maritime claims can be found in the Limitation Act, the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, the Foreign Limitation Periods Act, and the Maritime Conventions Act. As this bulletin is intended to be for information only, formal legal advice from a lawyer should be obtained for any particular claim as much could turn on the particular facts of the case.Limitation Act
This Act covers a wide scope of claims, but the most relevant type for our purpose are claims in contract, tort, personal injury, and for latent damage.
- Contractual claims: six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued (section 6 ).
- Action for negligence, nuisance or breach of duty in respect of personal injuries, latent injuries and damage, whichever is later of:
- three years from the date on which the cause of action accrued; or
- three years from the earliest date on which the claimant has the knowledge required for bringing an action for damages in respect of the relevant injury.
For disputes litigated in Singapore but governed by the laws of another jurisdiction, the law that governs the dispute provides the applicable limitation period (section 3).Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
This Act enacts the Hague Visby Rules ("HVR") into the law of Singapore with some amendments. The relevant limitations periods are found at:
- Article III, paragraph 6 – in respect of cargo: Subject to 6bis one year from their delivery or the date on which they should have been delivered.
- Article III, paragraph 6bis – An indemnity action against a third party may be brought even after the expiration of the year provided in (1) above, if brought within the time allowed by the law of the Court seized of the case, which shall be not less than 3 months from the day when the person bringing the action has settled the claim or been served with process in the action against himself.
Section 8 provides for a 2 year limitation period for claims regarding salvage services, or claims for damage or loss to another ship, her cargo or freight or any property on board her, or damages for loss of life or personal injuries suffered by any person on board her caused by the fault of the other ship. The limitation period runs from the date when the damage, loss or injury was caused or the salvage services were rendered.
To summarise in table form:
Nature of ClaimTime BarLegislation
|Contract and Tort||Within six years and from the date the cause of action accrued||Section 6 - Limitation Act|
|Personal Injury/death, latent injuries and damage||Within three years of accrual of the negligent act or omission or knowledge, if later||Section 24A(2) – Limitation Act|
|Foreign Limitation Periods||The law that governs the dispute provides the applicable limitation period.||Section 3 – Foreign Limitation Periods Act|
|Carriage of Goods by Sea|| |
Within 1 year of the date of delivery of goods or of the date when they should have been delivered.
Indemnity action may be brought even after the expiration of the year provided above, if brought within the time allowed by the law of the Court seized of the case, which shall be not less than 3 months from the day when the person bringing the action has settled the claim or been served with process in the action against himself.
|Schedule to the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act |
(Article III, paragraphs 6 and 6bis of the Hague Visby Rules)
|Maritime Conventions Act||2 year limitation period from the date when the damage, loss or injury was caused by the ship or the salvage services were rendered.||Section 8 – Maritime Conventions Act, 1911.|
You may also be interested in:
Quarterly case review from the UK P&I Club indicates that single liability principle does not operate in a collision claim where the claim of one of the shipowners is time-barred.
Until recently, it was not clear whether a party seeking to arrest a vessel in Malaysia had a duty to make full and frank disclosure in its affidavit leading to the warrant of arrest ("arrest affidavit").
No Suit for You: U.S. Eleventh Circuit Prohibits Contribution Claims Against the U.S. Government for Oil Spill Cleanup Costs
Savage Servs. Corp. v. United States, Slip Op. No. 21-10745 (11th Cir. Feb. 8, 2022).
QCR Winter 2021: The BIG FISH - duty to make full and frank disclosure of all material facts in Singapore arrest proceedings
The decision in "BIG FISH"  SGHCR 7 sets out the principles governing the duty of full and frank disclosure for a party applying for a warrant of arrest in Singapore, and in particular, considers whether it is necessary to disclose a potential time bar defence.