CONSTRUCTION LAW
The Court of Appeal (CA) on the 30th May in the case of Alliance Concrete Singapore Pte Ltd vs Sato Kogyo (S) Pte Ltd [2014] SGCA 35, dealt with upholding the validity of contracts and ensuring that they are performed according to their terms. The case also touched on the doctrine of Frustration. In the case, the CA held that the Sand Ban of 2007 was a supervening event that was not within the reasonable control of the parties (with both having contemplated that only Indonesian sand would be used) and therefore, the Contracts were discharged by Frustration.
The High Court made a distinction between substantive rights under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act and the Singapore Mediation Centres’ rules to facilitate the adjudication process in Man Source Interior Pte Ltd v Citiwall Safety Glass Pte Ltd [2014] SGHC86.
In the case of Qingjian International (South Pacific) Group Development Co Pte Ltd vs Capstone Engineering Ltd [2014] SGHCR 5, the High Court held that emails were not an appropriate mode of service of the order of Court granting leave to enforce an adjudication determination under the Building & Construction Industry Security of Payment Act.
Thank you, Anil Changaroth