Kosui Singapore v Kamigumi: Labor Subcontract Dispute over Universal Studios Singapore Project
Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd sued Kamigumi Singapore Pte Ltd and Kamigumi Co Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, claiming unpaid amounts for labor supplied for the Universal Studios Singapore project. Quentin Loh J. found that the original agreement between Kosui and Kamigumi Co Ltd remained valid, making both defendants jointly and severally liable. The court awarded Kosui $3,134,965.50 for additional manpower, $34,400 for lorry use, and dismissed Kamigumi's claim regarding Mr. Iwaki. The court also granted judgment for $125,149.87 against Kosui on Kamigumi's counterclaim.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Kosui Singapore sued Kamigumi over a labor subcontract for the Universal Studios Singapore project. The court found in favor of Kosui, awarding additional manpower costs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Kamigumi Singapore Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Lost | |
| Kamigumi Co Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Quentin Loh | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The Defendants were awarded a contract for Universal Studios Singapore's show and ride attractions.
- The Plaintiff became the labor subcontractor for the Defendants.
- The Plaintiff's first quotation was accepted by the 2nd Defendant, then a second identical quotation was accepted by the 1st Defendant.
- The contract included a clause stating that the Defendants would be charged accordingly if there were changes exceeding the original Bill of Quantities.
- The project experienced delays not caused by the Plaintiff, leading to a need for accelerated work.
- The Plaintiff supplied additional manpower and worked overtime to make up for lost time.
- The Plaintiff did not submit claims for additional interim payments during the period of accelerated work.
- The Plaintiff submitted a claim for additional work and costs at the end of the contract period.
- The 1st Defendant used the Plaintiff's lorry and driver to transport workers at the work site.
- The Plaintiff supplied Mr. Iwaki as the Attraction Manager for the Jurassic Park River Adventure attraction.
5. Formal Citations
- Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd v Kamigumi Singapore Pte Ltd and another, Suit No 312 of 2010, [2012] SGHC 43
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendants decided to secure the Universal Studios Singapore theme park contract. | |
| Kamimura met with Sakaniwa of Resort World Sentosa to discuss the contract. | |
| Kamimura sent Michinaka a fax with attachments setting out the Plaintiff’s quote. | |
| Meeting held to discuss the Plaintiff’s pending quote. | |
| Plaintiff sent the 2nd Defendant its quotation for its supply of labour and installation of equipment for the USS contract. | |
| Scheduled start date for the USS labour subcontract. | |
| Meeting held where Defendants allegedly asked Mr. Ito for confirmation that his quote covered contingencies. | |
| Maeda of the 2nd Defendant sent an email to the Plaintiff’s Mr Ito regarding the agreement. | |
| Plaintiff increased manpower to accelerate works. | |
| Scheduled end date for the USS labour subcontract. | |
| Contract period extended into mid-March. | |
| Last day the lorry was used. | |
| Defendants informed the court that they would not pursue their Counterclaim in respect of the sums paid to one Mr Oshita. | |
| Notes of Evidence. | |
| Notes of Evidence. | |
| Notes of Evidence. | |
| Notes of Evidence. | |
| Notes of Evidence. | |
| Oral judgment delivered. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found that the Defendants breached the contract by failing to pay for additional manpower supplied by the Plaintiff.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to pay for additional manpower
- Interpretation of contract terms
- Estoppel by Convention
- Outcome: The court held that the Plaintiff was not estopped by convention from claiming the total value of man hours incurred.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2006] 2 SLR(R) 195
- Joint and Several Liability
- Outcome: The court found the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for all sums due.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Construction Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
- Theme Park
- Entertainment
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singapore Telecommunications Ltd v Starhub Cable Vision Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 2 SLR(R) 195 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements to establish an estoppel by convention. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Civil Law Act (Cap 43, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Labour Subcontract
- Bill of Quantities
- Man Hours
- Acceleration Measures
- Lump Sum Contract
- Estoppel by Convention
- Joint and Several Liability
- Man Days
- Universal Studios Singapore
- GST
15.2 Keywords
- Construction
- Contract
- Labour
- Singapore
- Universal Studios
- Subcontract
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Breach of Contract | 75 |
| Contract Law | 70 |
| Construction Law | 60 |
| Construction Contracts | 55 |
| Commercial Disputes | 50 |
| Lump sum contract | 45 |
| Subcontract | 40 |
| Building and Construction Industry | 35 |
| Estoppel | 30 |
| Evidence | 25 |
16. Subjects
- Construction Dispute
- Contract Law
- Subcontracting
- Labor Law