Childcare centre sued for negligence after 4-year-old girl falls and fractures skull
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
The civil suit seeks general damages and special damages to be assessed by a district court, where the maximum claim amount is $250,000.
ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG
- A father is suing a Singapore childcare centre for negligence after his daughter fractured her skull falling from a slide. He seeks damages up to $250,000, including $56,000 in medical costs.
- The father alleges the centre failed to provide a safe environment by removing safety mats and that they tried to conceal the incident by editing CCTV footage.
- The centre denies negligence, stating the flooring was kid-friendly and that staff checked on the girl. They claim ECDA guidelines restrict sharing CCTV footage with parents.
AI generated
SINGAPORE – The father of a four-year-old girl is suing a childcare centre for negligence after she fell from a slide at the pre-school’s indoor playground during scheduled playtime and fractured her skull.
He is claiming at least $56,000 in medical-related expenses, according to court documents obtained by The Straits Times.
The civil suit seeks general damages and special damages to be assessed by a district court, where the maximum claim amount is $250,000.
The parties are not named to protect the girl’s identity.
She sustained concussion, a skull fracture and a brain contusion, and was hospitalised between March 13 and 21 in 2025. An MRI showed no “obvious” aneurysm in the brain.
A pre-trial hearing is scheduled for Feb 6.
The lawsuit alleges that the centre failed to ensure a safe environment by failing to place safety mats on the floor.
According to the girl’s father, the safety mats that were originally placed on the floor were removed for washing on the day of the incident on March 13, 2025.
He also alleges that the centre tried to cover up information about the fall, and provided edited CCTV footage only seven hours after the incident.
The centre has denied that it was negligent.
It said in its defence that that the flooring was child-friendly and can cushion toddler falls.
The fact that mats were placed on the floor did not constitute an acceptance that such mats were necessary, said the centre.
It said the footage was edited to protect the privacy of the children and staff, and that Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) guidelines did not allow CCTV footage to be sent to parents, as a safeguard to protect the privacy and safety of staff and other children.
Before the girl fell, there had been no incidents of children falling from the top of the slide, which is about 1m from the ground, said the centre, which opened in 2019.
The girl had fallen off the slide at about 11am.
At about 11.30am, a staff member told the girl’s mother that the child had landed on her arm.
The staff member also told the mother that the girl had vomited, but said that this could be because the class was told to drink water before playtime.
The mother picked the girl up at around 12.40pm. At around 1pm, she noticed a bump on the left side of the girl’s head.
The parents took the girl to Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital’s accident and emergency (A&E) department.
When the girl vomitted again at about 2pm, the doctor ordered a CT scan, which indicated a 33mm fracture at the base of the skull.
The doctor asked the parents to get more details from the centre as this would be important for his prognosis.
The girl was admitted to a high-dependency ward and vomited again.
At around 4.20pm, the father spoke to the principal and asked for the CCTV footage, but she cited ECDA policy.
After the man pressed further, the principal provided four blurred screenshots.
Then he reiterated his request, and she offered to send the footage directly to the girl’s neurosurgeon, who insisted that it be sent to the parents.
At about 6.30pm, the principal sent over footage, which did not show the time of the incident and was zoomed-in such that two staff members standing nearby could not be fully seen.
The man alleges that the footage was edited as part of a calculated attempt to cover up the centre’s negligence and the staff’s failure to ensure adequate supervision.
According to the centre, the two staff members had their attention momentarily drawn away by a commotion at the time the girl fell from the slide.
The centre said they immediately checked on her, asked her to describe how she fell, and applied an ice pack and compression to her elbow and ear.
The centre said the staff took a video of the girl walking in a straight line after her mother asked if she could walk steadily.
The centre said it was only around 1.10pm that the principal was able to view the CCTV footage; she offered to go down to the A&E department to show the father the unedited footage but he declined.
In the light of this, edited screenshots were sent to the father to protect the privacy of the other people seen in the footage, said the centre.
The father is represented by Ms Melanie Ho and Ms Jolyn Khoo of WongPartnership, while the centre is represented by Mr Daniel Seow of Allen & Gledhill.
