Projection Pte Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance: Contractors' All Risks Policy Dispute

In a dispute before the High Court of Singapore, Projection Pte Ltd, a construction company, sued The Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited to enforce a compromise agreement for an insurance claim under a Contractors' All Risks policy. The claim arose from damage to a canal during a construction project. The court, Lai Siu Chiu J, dismissed Projection Pte Ltd's claim, finding that no compromise agreement had been reached between the parties.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiffs' claim dismissed with costs to the defendants.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court case involving Projection Pte Ltd and The Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited over a Contractors' All Risks policy claim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Projection Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost
The Tai Ping Insurance Company LimitedDefendantCorporationJudgment for DefendantWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Tan Liam BengDrew & Napier
Yap Pett ChinDrew & Napier
Low Tiang HockChor Pee & Co
Jack Lee Tsen-TaChor Pee & Co

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiffs were main contractors for a sports and recreation centre.
  2. Defendants issued a Contractors' All Risks policy for the project.
  3. A retaining wall collapsed, damaging a canal.
  4. Plaintiffs claimed under the policy for the damage.
  5. Loss adjusters assessed the claim.
  6. Defendants made two offers to settle the claim.
  7. Plaintiffs rejected the offers and amended the discharge voucher.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Projection Pte Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited, Suit 1301/1999, [2000] SGHC 146

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Contractors' All Risks policy taken out for the project.
Performance bond dated for the project.
Policy period began.
Retaining wall collapsed, damaging a canal.
Notice of claim given to the defendants.
Loss adjusters appointed to investigate the damage.
Maintenance period of the policy began.
Loss adjusters assessed the plaintiffs' claim.
Plaintiffs requested brokers to expedite claim.
Plaintiffs wrote to defendants asking for payment.
Plaintiffs wrote to defendants to record that the defendants were processing the plaintiffs claim.
Defendants made the first offer.
Plaintiffs questioned the amount of the first offer.
Meeting held to discuss the claim.
Defendants made the second offer.
Plaintiffs returned the discharge voucher.
Plaintiffs sent a reminder to the defendants.
Plaintiffs visited Li who offered a goodwill settlement.
Plaintiffs' solicitors sent a letter demanding the compromise sum.
Writ of summons filed.
Defendants' solicitors withdrew any offer of settlement.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that no compromise agreement existed, therefore there was no breach of contract.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Offer and Acceptance
    • Outcome: The court held that the plaintiffs had rejected the defendant's offers and made a counter-offer, so no agreement was reached.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Consideration
    • Outcome: The court noted the paucity of the plaintiffs' pleadings and submissions on the issue of consideration, indicating the non-existence of a compromise agreement.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Insurance Claims

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Insurance

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
N/AN/ANoN/AN/AN/A

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Contractors' All Risks policy
  • Compromise agreement
  • Discharge voucher
  • Loss Payee
  • Offer
  • Acceptance
  • Consideration

15.2 Keywords

  • insurance
  • contract
  • construction
  • settlement
  • compromise
  • all risks policy

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Insurance75
Construction Insurance65
Contract Law60
Compromise Agreement55
Breach of Contract50
Performance Bond40

16. Subjects

  • Insurance Dispute
  • Contract Law
  • Construction Law