Woman Sues Sheng Siong After Employee Allegedly Hits Her With Trolley Loaded With Bags of Rice   👉 https://goodyfeed.com/woman-sues-sheng-siong-after-employee-allegedly-hits-her-with-trolley-loaded-with-bags-of-rice/   Here's the full detailed account of the case:       Case Overview   Case Name: Dong Lihua v Sheng Siong Employee & Anor | Case No.: MC/OC 1856/2024  Parties:   - Claimant: Ms Dong Lihua (represented by I.R.B Law LLP)  - Defendants: Unnamed Sheng Siong employee; Sheng Siong Supermarket Pte Ltd (represented by LVM Law Chambers LLC)  Status: Pending before the Singapore State Courts as of 10 Sep 2026        1. Incident Details   - Date & Time: 11 March 2021, approx 10:00 am  - Location: Sheng Siong outlet, Clementi West Street 2, Singapore  - What Happened: - Ms Dong was shopping when an employee pushing a trolley loaded with multiple bags of rice struck her from behind  - Trolley dimensions: 155 cm tall × 122 cm long  - Impact hit back of left foot and her back; incident recorded by store CCTV  - Branch manager accompanied her to a nearby clinic; later treated at Clementi Polyclinic and National University Hospital        2. Alleged Injuries & Effects   - Left foot: Bruising, swelling, abrasion, bruised heel, restricted ankle movement - Back: Aggravated pre-existing degenerative disc disease  - Subsequent conditions: Chronic pain syndrome, depression    Note: These medical effects form part of Ms Dong’s case and have not been established by the court.        3. Claimant’s Case (Statement of Claim dated 5 Mar 2024)    - Employee pushed trolley too fast, failed to keep lookout, did not slow down or avoid her  - Sheng Siong liable for employee’s negligence; also failed to: - Provide sufficient walkway space - Give proper staff training - Provide adequate supervision    Damages Sought:   Item Amount  Medical expenses S$9,309.74[__LINK_ICON]  Transport expenses S$1,783.95[__LINK_ICON]  Total special damages claimed ~S$11,093.69  Pain, suffering, loss of amenity Amount to be assessed by court[__LINK_ICON]  Future medical & transport costs Amount to be assessed by court[__LINK_ICON]        4. Sheng Siong’s Defence (dated 18 Jul 2024)    - Denies all negligence — neither company nor employee at fault  - Version: Employee pushing trolley to fruit section when Ms Dong emerged from an aisle and walked directly into its path  - Contends she failed to watch where she was going and did not take reasonable steps to avoid collision — her own negligence caused/contributed to accident  - Also disputes that her claimed injuries, losses and expenses were caused by any negligence on their part        5. Timeline   Date Event  11 Mar 2021 Incident occurs[__LINK_ICON]  5 Mar 2024 Ms Dong files claim[__LINK_ICON]  18 Jul 2024 Sheng Siong files defence[__LINK_ICON]  18 Jun 2026 Case Conference held at State Courts[__LINK_ICON]  10 Sep 2026 Case remains pending; no ruling on liability issued[__LINK_ICON]         

To be honest, need to ask about what manager said - ask the fucking manager la. Ask about strategy - ask the manager   The hosts and ex-players acting as commentators also ask a lot of stupid questions - and the fans deserve these kind of answers 

'Asking isn’t criticising,' say Singaporeans about questions raised by WP's Kenneth Tiong on SIA, Air India: Minister for Transport Jeffrey Siow answered Mr Tiong's questions in Parliament on Sep. 8, but added, “It’s easy to criticise, but I suspect it’s much harder for the member (MP Kenneth Tiong) to tell us what Singapore Airlines (SIA) should do." Netizens, however, said the WP MP was right to have asked the questions he did   🔗 Read more: https://theindependent.sg/asking-isn-t-criticising-say-singaporeans-about-questions-raised-by-wp-s-kenneth-tiong-on-sia-air-india/   Here’s the full detailed account from The Independent Singapore, 11 Sep 2026:       Background   On 26 Aug 2026, Workers’ Party Aljunied MP Kenneth Tiong posted on Facebook:   “No one, least of all Singaporeans, owes Air India a living. I will not support, nor expect, any future use of Temasek’s funds to prop up Air India via Singapore Airlines. If Singapore Airlines wants to continue its bet on Air India, it should do so on its own two feet, and not on Temasek’s.”   The issue: Air India — in which SIA holds a 25.1% minority stake — reported large losses and reportedly asked shareholders Tata Sons & SIA for an additional US$1.5 billion (S$1.9b) in fresh capital. Online discussion became tainted with racist/xenophobic comments, which Tiong and others condemned. On 5 Sep, Tiong clarified: his concerns were purely commercial, and there is zero tolerance for racism.       Parliament — 8 Sep 2026   Tiong raised two formal questions:   1. Given SIA is a designated essential operating entity, have Air India-related losses been assessed against SIA’s ability to deliver essential air services to Singapore? 2. Would sustained losses trigger a legal notification requirement to the Government under the CAAS Act?    He further pressed: would the Government rule out future support via Temasek/reserves if the investment worsens? Is there a clear limit on further funding?   Minister Jeffrey Siow’s response   - No present threat to SIA’s Singapore operations; Air India’s losses ≠ SIA’s direct losses. - Air India’s capital request does not legally/financially oblige SIA to contribute. SIA has not sought extra capital from shareholders. - He criticised Tiong’s framing:   “He has drawn these multiple tenuous linkages, dressed them up in emotive terms, insinuated that through SIA’s investments, Singaporeans somehow owe Air India a living, and suggested that SIA is not making its investment decisions on a commercial basis… There is no basis for this. It’s easy to criticise, but I suspect it is much harder for the member to tell us what SIA should do.”   Notably, Siow did not explicitly rule out future government backing or identify a funding cap.       Public / Netizen Reaction   Singaporeans online widely backed Tiong, rejecting the “criticism” label:   - “Asking questions isn’t criticising.” — Facebook user - “WE ARE NOT CRITICISING, WE ARE CONCERNED… Kenneth Tiong has a duty to ask in Parliament on behalf of Singaporeans. His questions are valid, genuinely Singaporeans’ concerns too.” - “Sir, just questions only. If you have very good reason, just explain la… Questions make people think carefully. In school, teachers always like students to ask questions so that there is clarity.” - On Reddit: “Why do they keep questioning that KT’s message was racially divisive when KT was clear he was questioning the risk aspect?”   Tiong also stated: “Singaporeans are best served when we can hold two things at once: zero tolerance for racism & hard questions about money.”       🔗 Source: The Independent Singapore   Would you like a concise timeline or a summary of key points only?

Garang guni has a new meaning nowadays. But to be fair they did not rob or steal and that is important.