The 60-second answer: Per Section 34 of the Professional Engineers Act 1991 (renumbered from the older Section 24 by Act 36 of 2017), every licensed corporation (other than an unlimited corporation) and every licensed limited liability partnership supplying professional engineering services in Singapore must be insured against liability for breach of professional duty. Per the Professional Engineers Board, "the PE Act does not specify the amount to be insured." The minimum sum insured is left to the licensee's judgement, subject to compliance with section 34 and the Professional Engineers Rules.

Find a licensed IFA →

The Sourced Detail

The legal framework

The Professional Engineers Board Singapore (PEB) is a statutory board under the Ministry of National Development. Per the PEB website, PEB is responsible for "advancing, developing and regulating professional engineering" in Singapore.

Per the Professional Engineers Act 1991 (current consolidated version on Singapore Statutes Online), individual professional engineers (PEs) are registered under Part 4 and must hold a Practising Certificate under Part 5 to do professional engineering work in Singapore. Multi-discipline corporations, partnerships, and LLPs that supply professional engineering services must be licensed under Part 6.

Section 34 — Liability Insurance

Per the PEA, Section 34:

"Every licensed corporation which is not an unlimited corporation and every licensed limited liability partnership shall be insured against liability for any breach of professional duty arising out of the conduct of its business of supplying professional engineering services as a direct result of any negligent act, error or omission committed by — (a) in the case of a corporation, the corporation or its directors, managers, secretaries or employees; or (b) in the case of a limited liability partnership, the limited liability partnership or its partners, managers or employees."

Note three things:

  1. The duty applies to licensed corporations and licensed LLPs, not to sole-practitioner PEs or wholly-PE partnerships (which need not be licensed under PEA per PEB Common Queries: "A partnership consisting wholly of registered professional engineers need not be licensed by the Board.").
  2. Unlimited corporations are exempt from the s.34 insurance duty (because the unlimited liability of shareholders provides the protection in lieu).
  3. Section 34 (formerly Section 24) was renumbered effective 15 January 2018 by Act 36 of 2017.

How much insurance is enough?

Per the PEB Common Queries page, addressing this question directly:

"For licensed limited corporations, is there a limit to the indemnity in the professional liability insurance policy which a licensed corporation has to take up? The PE Act does not specify the amount to be insured. However, the professional indemnity insurance policy must comply with section 34 of the Professional Engineers Act."

The Professional Engineers Rules (the only subsidiary legislation governing licensing) require an applicant corporation to file "a certified true copy of any policy insuring the corporation against professional liability in accordance with the Act and the rules made thereunder for such period as the corporation is licensed to supply professional engineering services" — but do not prescribe a quantum.

So the limit is set by:

  • Project-by-project contractual requirements — many BCA, LTA, or PUB tenders specify minimum PI amounts depending on project value and discipline.
  • Client requirements in the consulting agreement.
  • The firm's own assessment of worst-case design liability across its project portfolio.

Industry practice in Singapore, per analyses such as the PLUS commentary on construction professional liability, commonly sees PE firms carrying limits ranging from a few million Singapore dollars for small consultancies up to substantially higher figures for large multi-discipline firms doing complex public infrastructure.

Claims-made and retroactive cover

Per the PLUS analysis: "Crucially, professional indemnity policies are written on a claims-made basis, which means that they respond to claims that are first made against the insured during the period of the insurance."

Three implications follow:

  • Retroactive date — your policy needs to include a retroactive date covering historical project work, otherwise old project claims fall through.
  • Continuous renewal — gaps in cover create claims-made gaps in protection.
  • Run-off — when winding up the corporation, you typically need run-off cover spanning the limitation period for tort and contract claims, though latent defects can extend this further.

QPs and the section 34 trigger

Per the PLUS analysis, professional engineers in Singapore often act as "qualified persons" (QPs) under the Building Control Act for plan submission to BCA, SCDF (fire), and LTA. QP appointments concentrate liability — a structural QP signs off on plans, accepts duties under the Building Control Act, and faces both criminal and civil exposures.

QP work is professional engineering work for the purposes of section 34. If your licensed PE corporation undertakes QP work, your section 34 cover must respond to QP-related claims. Some firms maintain a separate "QP-specific" PI extension; others rely on their main PI provided it isn't carved out.

Comparison with the Architects Act

For context, Section 24 of the Architects Act 1991 imposes the equivalent insurance duty on licensed architectural corporations and LLPs — same structure, same "Act does not specify amount" position.

What This Means for Your Business

If you operate as a licensed PE corporation, section 34 PI is non-optional. The interesting question is not "do I need it" (you do) but "how much, and in what structure."

The practical decision tree:

  • Sole-practitioner PE in own name (not licensed corporation) : section 34 doesn't apply directly to you; but you still face professional negligence exposure personally. PI on a sole-practitioner basis is sensible.
  • Wholly-PE partnership (not licensed) : section 34 doesn't apply; partners face joint and several liability. PI at the partnership level is sensible.
  • Licensed corporation (not unlimited) : section 34 mandatory. Set the limit based on largest QP responsibility you've ever signed off on, with margin for legal costs.
  • Licensed LLP : section 34 mandatory. Limit-setting same logic.
  • Unlimited corporation : section 34 exempt — but only because the shareholders accept unlimited personal liability.

A frequent trap: the "design-and-build" boundary. If your PE corporation is also doing build (e.g., a small engineering firm that subcontracts works), CAR insurance and PL insurance overlap with PI on the same project. Co-ordinated programme structuring matters.

Questions to Ask Your Adviser

  1. My licensed PE corporation does [structural / M&E / civil] work. What limit reflects my QP exposure?
  2. What's my retroactive date — does it cover all historical project work?
  3. If I'm winding the corporation up, what run-off term should I purchase?
  4. I'm both a PE corporation and a licensed builder under BCA — how do my PI, CAR, and PL coordinate?
  5. My biggest project carries QP responsibility — does my current limit hold up against worst-case?

Match with a licensed IFA →

Related Information

  • BCA QPs and the Building Control Act
  • Architects Act section 24 — parallel insurance duty for architects
  • Claims-made vs occurrence: why it matters for PE firms

Published 3 May 2026. Source verified 3 May 2026. COVA is an introducer under MAS Notice FAA-N02. We do not recommend insurance products. We provide factual information sourced from primary regulators and route you to a licensed IFA who can match a policy to your specific situation.