Ensure Engineering v Invista: Breach of Contract for Boiler Maintenance and Chemical Cleaning

In a suit before the High Court of Singapore on 27 December 2005, Ensure Engineering Pte Ltd sued Invista (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as Du Pont Singapore Pte Ltd) for breach of contract, alleging failure to pay for maintenance, cleaning, and repair services performed on Invista's industrial boiler. Invista counterclaimed, asserting that Ensure Engineering failed to properly execute chemical cleaning services, causing damage to the boiler. The court, presided over by Justice Kan Ting Chiu, allowed Ensure Engineering's claim for maintenance and additional work, ordering an assessment of the amount due, but dismissed the claim for chemical cleaning work and Invista's counterclaim.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff in part, Counterclaim Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Ensure Engineering sued Invista for failing to pay for boiler maintenance. Invista counterclaimed for damages due to improper chemical cleaning. The court allowed Ensure's claim for maintenance but dismissed the chemical cleaning claim and Invista's counterclaim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ensure Engineering Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim 1 AllowedWon
Invista (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as Du Pont Singapore Pte Ltd)DefendantCorporationCounterclaim DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lim May LiLim and Pillay
Vinodh S Coomaraswamy SCShook Lin and Bok
Elaine WongShook Lin and Bok

4. Facts

  1. Ensure Engineering contracted to provide maintenance, cleaning, and repair services for Invista's industrial boiler.
  2. The agreed price for maintenance and repair works was $160,000, with an additional $75,000 for a chemical clean.
  3. Ensure Engineering claimed an additional $279,467.44 for extra work on the boiler.
  4. Invista refused to pay for the work, leading Ensure Engineering to file a lawsuit.
  5. Invista counterclaimed for $698,548.71, alleging Ensure Engineering's failure to properly execute the chemical clean damaged the boiler.
  6. The chemical clean involved using hydrochloric acid and an inhibitor.
  7. Invista alleged that Ensure Engineering used an insufficient concentration of inhibitor during the chemical clean.
  8. Leaks were detected in the boiler after the chemical clean, and inspections revealed damage to the plugs and welds.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ensure Engineering Pte Ltd v Invista (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as Du Pont Singapore Pte Ltd), Suit 211/2004, [2005] SGHC 237

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Defendant instructed plaintiff to clean the boiler.
Chemical dosing commenced.
Leak detected at south wall tube.
Another leak discovered in the steam drum.
South wall tube repaired and tested.
Magnetic particle inspection tests carried out.
Magnetic particle inspection tests carried out.
Dr. Andy Tack visited the site to inspect the drums and collect plug samples.
Plaintiff replaced the fallen refractory and 231 plugs.
MPT-Matcor Pte Ltd submitted a report.
Boiler re-commissioned.
Boiler back at full operational capacity.
Suit filed (Suit 211/2004).
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found the defendant liable for payment for work done under Claim 1 and Claim 3, but not for Claim 2.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to pay for work done
      • Failure to carry out services in accordance with contract
  2. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant had not proven that the damage to the boiler was caused by the plaintiff's negligence.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Engineering

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

  • Industrial boiler
  • Chemical cleaning
  • Hydrochloric acid
  • Inhibitor
  • Plugs
  • Fillet weldment
  • Acid attack
  • Galvanic effect
  • Method statement

15.2 Keywords

  • Breach of contract
  • Boiler maintenance
  • Chemical cleaning
  • Negligence
  • Counterclaim
  • Singapore High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Breach of Contract90
Contract Law85
Debt Recovery70
Damages60
Negligence50
Industrial Boiler Maintenance40
Personal Injury30

16. Subjects

  • Contract Dispute
  • Construction Dispute