Chua Say Eng v Lee Wee Lick Terence: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination under Security of Payment Act
In Chua Say Eng (formerly trading as Weng Fatt Construction Engineering) v Lee Wee Lick Terence, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by the Defendant, Lee Wee Lick Terence, to set aside an adjudication determination awarding the Plaintiff, Chua Say Eng, $125,450.40 under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (SOPA). The court, presided over by Leo Zhen Wei Lionel AR, considered the validity of the payment claim, the method of its service, and whether it was served within the statutory timeframe. The court dismissed the application, finding the payment claim validly served and not time-barred.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court considered setting aside an adjudication determination, addressing the validity and service of payment claims under the SOPA.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chua Say Eng (formerly trading as Weng Fatt Construction Engineering) | Plaintiff | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Lee Wee Lick Terence @ Li Weili Terence | Defendant | Individual | Application dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Leo Zhen Wei Lionel | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The Plaintiff was engaged as the main contractor for reconstruction works on the Defendant's house.
- The original contract sum was $420,000.00, later increased to $542,000.00 due to additional works.
- The Defendant alleged the Plaintiff was in repudiatory breach of contract.
- The Defendant terminated the contract via letter dated 21 April 2010.
- The Plaintiff served a Payment Claim No. 6 on the Defendant claiming $140,450.40.
- The Payment Claim was served by leaving it at the Defendant’s residential address and construction address.
- The Defendant did not serve a payment response to the Payment Claim.
5. Formal Citations
- Chua Say Eng (formerly trading as Weng Fatt Construction Engineering) v Lee Wee Lick Terence @ Li Weili Terence, Originating Summons No. 783 of 2010 (Summons No. 4136 of 2010), [2010] SGHC 333
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff engaged as main contractor for reconstruction works. | |
| Defendant gave Plaintiff ‘Final Notice’ alleging repudiatory breach. | |
| Defendant purported to accept Plaintiff’s repudiation and terminated the Contract. | |
| Plaintiff instructed to vacate the site of the Project by 12pm. | |
| Plaintiff obtained a valuation report. | |
| Plaintiff served Payment Claim No. 6 on the Defendant. | |
| Due date for payment response. | |
| Dispute settlement period expired. | |
| Plaintiff served the Defendant with a Notice of Intention to Apply for Adjudication. | |
| Plaintiff filed an adjudication application with the Singapore Mediation Centre. | |
| Deadline for Defendant to lodge an adjudication response with the SMC. | |
| Adjudicator released the Adjudication Determination. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Validity of Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court determined that the payment claim was valid under the SOPA.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2010] 1 SLR 733
- [2010] 3 SLR 459
- Service of Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court found that service of the payment claim was properly effected.
- Category: Procedural
- Limitation Period for Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court held that there is no limitation period for the service of payment claims under the SOPA.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary compensation
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Claim for Work Done
10. Practice Areas
- Construction Litigation
- Adjudication
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEF Construction Pte Ltd v Skoy Connected Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 733 | Singapore | Discusses the court's role in setting aside applications under the SOPA, particularly regarding the review of adjudicator's decisions. |
| Sungdo Engineering & Construction (S) Pte Ltd v Italcor Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 459 | Singapore | Addresses the validity of a payment claim and whether the court can examine this issue on judicial review. |
| Brodyn Pty Ltd v Davenport | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | [2004] NSWCA 394 | Australia | Discusses whether the court should review an adjudicator’s decision regarding the 'basic and essential' requirements of the New South Wales legislation. |
| Chase Oyster Bar v Hamo Industries | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] NSWCA 190 | Australia | Deals with the requirement of serving a notice of intention to apply for adjudication in time and its effect on the validity of the adjudication. |
| Associated Provincial Picture Houses, Limited v Wednesbury Corporation | England and Wales High Court (Divisional Court) | Yes | [1948] 1 KB 223 | England and Wales | Cited in relation to the unreasonableness standard in judicial review. |
| Chip Hup Hup Kee Construction Pte Ltd v Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 658 | Singapore | Discusses the policy behind the SOPA, which is to maintain cash flow in the construction industry. |
| Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd v Macind Drainage & Hydraulic Services Pty Ltd | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | [2002] NSWCA 238 | Australia | Discusses the interpretation of statutory rights and the conditions for availing them. |
| Torpey Vander Have Pty Ltd v Mass Constructions Pty Ltd | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | [2002] NSWCA 263 | Australia | Deals with progress claims and the timing of such claims as per the contract. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap. 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap. 1, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Adjudication Determination
- Payment Claim
- Security of Payment Act
- Repudiatory Breach
- Adjudication Application
- Payment Response
- Construction Contract
- Service of Documents
15.2 Keywords
- adjudication
- payment claim
- security of payment
- construction
- SOPA
- service
- limitation period
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act | 95 |
| Construction Law | 70 |
| Contracts | 60 |
| Administrative Law | 30 |
| Civil Procedure | 25 |
16. Subjects
- Construction Dispute
- Adjudication
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure