JFC Builders v Lioncity Construction: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination Under SOPA
In JFC Builders Pte Ltd v Lioncity Construction Company Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard an application by JFC Builders to set aside an adjudication determination in favor of Lioncity Construction under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (SOPA). JFC Builders argued that Progress Claim No. 8 was an invalid repeat claim and served out of time. The court allowed the application, setting aside the adjudication determination on the basis that Progress Claim No. 8 had been served out of time. The court declined to hear arguments on setting aside the order for enforcement made in the Subordinate Courts.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Adjudication determination set aside.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
JFC Builders sought to set aside an adjudication determination favoring Lioncity Construction under the SOPA, arguing an invalid payment claim. The court allowed the application.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JFC Builders Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Prayer 1 Granted, Prayer 2 - No Order Made | Won, Neutral | Kishan Pillay |
| Lioncity Construction Company Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Adjudication Determination Set Aside | Lost | Zhou Jingdi Cynthea |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chew Yi-Ling Elaine | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Kishan Pillay | TSMP Law Corporation |
| Zhou Jingdi Cynthea | Rajah & Tann LLP |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff was the main contractor for a hotel development.
- Defendant was engaged as a subcontractor for structural works.
- Defendant submitted Progress Claim No 7 for works done up to 30 November 2010.
- Plaintiff made a partial payment after the period to lodge a request for adjudication expired.
- Defendant submitted Progress Claim No 8, identical to Progress Claim No 7, on 24 January 2011.
- Plaintiff did not issue a payment response to Progress Claim No 8.
- Defendant lodged an adjudication application in respect of Progress Claim No 8.
- The adjudicator determined that the plaintiff should pay the defendant $204,734.09 plus interest and costs.
5. Formal Citations
- JFC Builders Pte Ltd v Lioncity Construction Company Pte Ltd, Originating Summons 547 of 2012, [2012] SGHCR 12
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant issued letter of offer for structural works. | |
| Plaintiff accepted letter of offer for structural works. | |
| Defendant issued letter of offer for architectural works. | |
| Last date of works carried out. | |
| Defendant submitted Progress Claim No 7. | |
| Defendant submitted Progress Claim No 8. | |
| Defendant lodged adjudication application. | |
| Adjudication determination issued. | |
| Defendant filed Originating Summons No 141 of 2012 in the Subordinate Courts. | |
| Defendant obtained leave to enforce the adjudication determination. | |
| Plaintiff took out OS 547 to set aside the adjudication determination. | |
| Oral judgment delivered. | |
| Decision Date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Validity of Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court held that Progress Claim No. 8 was served out of time and therefore invalid.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Repeat claim
- Time bar
- Jurisdiction of the Court
- Outcome: The court declined to hear arguments on the setting aside of an order made in the Subordinate Courts, finding it lacked jurisdiction.
- Category: Jurisdictional
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of adjudication determination
- Setting aside of order granting leave to enforce adjudication determination
9. Cause of Actions
- Statutory Claim under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act
10. Practice Areas
- Construction Litigation
- Adjudication
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sungdo Engineering & Construction (S) Pte Ltd v Italcor Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 459 | Singapore | Cited for the position that the court can review the validity of a payment claim under s 27(5) of the SOPA. |
| Chua Say Eng (formerly trading as Weng Fatt Construction Engineering) v Lee Wee Lick Terence (alias Li Weili Terence) | High Court | Yes | [2011] SGHC 109 | Singapore | Cited for the position that the court can review the validity of a payment claim and that payment claims for work done in a certain month must be served by the last day of the subsequent month. |
| SEF Construction Pte Ltd v Skoy Connected Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 733 | Singapore | Cited for the position that the court's power in an application to set aside an adjudication determination was restricted to supervising the conduct of the adjudicator, and should not extend to a review of the merits of the adjudication determination; this position was not followed. |
| AM Associates (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Laguna National Golf and Country Club Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2009] SGHC 260 | Singapore | Cited for the position that no review of the validity of the payment claim was possible under s 27(5); this position was not followed. |
| Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1947] 1 KB 223 | England and Wales | Cited in relation to the grounds of Wednesbury unreasonableness. |
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 |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 10(4) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Adjudication determination
- Payment claim
- Progress claim
- Security of Payment Act
- SOPA
- Adjudication application
- Adjudication review
- Wednesbury unreasonableness
- Time bar
15.2 Keywords
- Construction dispute
- Adjudication
- Payment claim
- SOPA
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Construction Law
- Adjudication
- Civil Procedure
17. Areas of Law
- Construction Law
- Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act
- Civil Procedure
- Adjudication