Qingjian v Capstone: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination Under SOPA for Payment Claim Dispute
Qingjian International (South Pacific) Group Development Co Pte Ltd, the plaintiff, applied to set aside an adjudication determination in favor of Capstone Engineering Pte Ltd, the defendant, under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act. The High Court of Singapore, presided over by Eunice Chua AR, dismissed the application, finding that there was a contract in writing between the parties and that the payment claim was validly served. The dispute arose from a payment claim for masonry and plastering works on a Housing and Development Board project.
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
Qingjian's application to set aside an adjudication determination was dismissed. The court found a contract in writing existed and the payment claim was validly served.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capstone Engineering Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Adjudication determination upheld | Won | A Rajandran of A Rajandran |
| Qingjian International (South Pacific) Group Development Co Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Eunice Chua | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| A Rajandran | A Rajandran |
| Lim Yao Jun | Kelvin Chia Partnership |
| Tan Yeow Hiang | Kelvin Chia Partnership |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff was the main contractor for a Housing and Development Board project.
- Defendant was engaged as a sub-contractor for masonry and plastering works.
- Defendant initially regarded Qingdao Construction as the party who had engaged its services.
- Defendant issued a quotation to Qingdao Construction on 8 January 2013.
- There was no signed written contract between the plaintiff and the defendant or Qingdao and the defendant.
- Disputes arose relating to the payment claims submitted by the defendant.
- AA 105/2013 was settled at mediation on 18 July 2013.
5. Formal Citations
- Qingjian International (South Pacific) Group Development Co Pte Ltd v Capstone Engineering Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 1022 of 2013, [2014] SGHCR 5
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant issued a quotation to Qingdao Construction. | |
| Defendant lodged an adjudication application against Qingdao Construction. | |
| Defendant made its 4th payment claim against the plaintiff. | |
| Plaintiff objected to the 4th payment claim. | |
| Plaintiff served its payment response to the 4th payment claim. | |
| AA 105/2013 was settled at mediation. | |
| Defendant filed AA 126/2013. | |
| Plaintiff attempted to file an adjudication response. | |
| Adjudicator issued a determination on a preliminary issue. | |
| Adjudicator issued her adjudication determination on the merits of AA 126/2013. | |
| Payment was not made by the due date. | |
| Defendant filed Originating Summons No 887 of 2013. | |
| Defendant’s application was granted. | |
| Order of court granting leave was served on the plaintiff’s solicitors. | |
| Plaintiff received documents by post. | |
| Plaintiff filed the application to set aside the adjudication determination. | |
| Hearing on the application to set aside. | |
| Hearing on the application to set aside. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Contract in Writing
- Outcome: The court found that there was a contract in writing between the plaintiff and the defendant within the meaning of the Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 1 SLR 401
- [2010] 1 SLR 733
- Service of Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court found that there was valid service of the 4th payment claim within the meaning of the Act.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 1 SLR 401
- Service of Order Granting Leave
- Outcome: The court determined the preliminary issue in favour of the plaintiff.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2012] 4 SLR 1096
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of adjudication determination
9. Cause of Actions
- Statutory Action under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act
10. Practice Areas
- Construction Litigation
- Adjudication
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee Wee Lick Terence v Chua Say Eng | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 401 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that non-compliance with essential provisions of the Act can invalidate an adjudication determination. |
| SEF Construction Pte Ltd v Skoy Connected Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 733 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the existence of a contract between the claimant and the respondent is an essential condition for the Act to apply. |
| Chia Kim Huay (litigation representative of the estate of Chua Chye Hee, deceased) v Saw Shu Mawa Min Min and another | N/A | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 1096 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that service is effected when the order granting leave is actually received. |
| JFC Builders Pte Ltd v LionCity Construction Co Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 1157 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that no estoppel could have arisen as this was a matter for the court to decide and not the adjudicator. |
| Admin Construction Pte Ltd v Vivaldi (S) Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2013] 3 SLR 609 | Singapore | Cited for concerns with a late challenge to an adjudicator’s jurisdiction. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 95 r 2(4) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 62 r 6(3) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 62 r 6(1) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 95 r 2(3) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 95 r 3(1)(b) |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 95 r 3(1)(c) |
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 27(5) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 4(1) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 4(3) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 4(4) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 10(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 37 | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 37(3) | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B, 2006 Rev Ed) s 37(1) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed) s 2(5) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Adjudication determination
- Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act
- Payment claim
- Payment response
- Contract in writing
- Service of documents
- Adjudication application
15.2 Keywords
- Adjudication
- Construction
- Security of Payment Act
- Contract
- Payment Claim
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act | 95 |
| Construction Law | 90 |
| Contract Law | 60 |
| Civil Procedure | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Construction Dispute
- Adjudication
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure