Smile Inc v OP3 International: Defective Construction & Flooding at Suntec City Clinic

Smile Inc Dental Surgeons Pte Ltd sued OP3 International Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore on October 5, 2017, for damages and losses resulting from defective fitting-out works at their Suntec City clinic. Smile Inc claimed OP3's negligence led to two flooding incidents and the forfeiture of a fitting-out deposit. OP3 counterclaimed for unpaid sums. The court found OP3 liable for the defective design and construction of the drainage system, which caused the flooding, and for the forfeiture of the fitting-out deposit. The court ordered interlocutory judgment for Smile Inc, with damages to be assessed, and allowed OP3's counterclaim in part, to be set off against Smile Inc's damages.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Interlocutory judgment for the plaintiff with damages to be assessed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Dental clinic sues OP3 for damages due to defective fitting-out works causing flooding. Court finds OP3 liable for design flaws and orders damages.

1.7 Decision Date

4 October 2017

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Smile Inc Dental Surgeons Pte Ltd	Plaintiff	Corporation	Interlocutory Judgment	Partial	Ho Chien Mien of Allen & Gledhill LLP Ng Chee Jian of Allen & Gledhill LLP
OP3 International Pte Ltd	Defendant	Corporation	Counterclaim Allowed in Part	Partial	Vijai Dharamdas Parwani of Parwani Law LLC Nicholas Winarta Chandra of Parwani Law LLC

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Chan Seng Onn	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Ho Chien Mien	Allen & Gledhill LLP
Ng Chee Jian	Allen & Gledhill LLP
Vijai Dharamdas Parwani	Parwani Law LLC
Nicholas Winarta Chandra	Parwani Law LLC

4. Facts

Plaintiff hired defendant for fitting-out works at Suntec City clinic.
Works included plumbing system for dental chairs.
Plaintiff required completion by September 11, 2013.
Two flooding incidents occurred due to drainage issues.
Defendant failed to provide as-built drawings.
Plaintiff's fitting-out deposit was forfeited.
Defendant counterclaimed for unpaid balance and variation works.

5. Formal Citations

Smile Inc Dental Surgeons Pte Ltd v OP3 International Pte Ltd, Suit No 498 of 2015, [2017] SGHC 246

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2013-01-01	Plaintiff appointed interior designer, Mr Peter Tay.
2013-07-19	Defendant submitted a quotation for the Works.
2013-08-31	Initial completion date for the Works.
2013-08-30	Defendant sent a revised work schedule to Ms Chong.
2013-09-11	Extended deadline for completion of the Works.
2013-09-12	Grand opening of the refurbished Suntec City Mall.
2013-10-31	Latest date the Suntec Clinic would have been handed over to the plaintiff.
2013-11-01	Plaintiff commenced operations in the Suntec Clinic.
2014-01-09	Plaintiff found mould growing on the walls of the filing room.
2014-01-17	First Flood occurred at the Suntec Clinic; plaintiff closed the clinic.
2014-03-08	Defendant returned possession of the Suntec Clinic to the plaintiff.
2014-07-21	Plaintiff discovered mould growth again.
2014-07-29	Second Flood occurred at the Suntec Clinic; plaintiff closed the clinic.
2015-03-05	Suntec Clinic remained closed.
2015-01-01	Suit No 498 of 2015 filed.
2016-07-28	MCST forfeited the Fitting-Out Deposit.
2017-02-01	Trial began.
2017-05-17	Judgment reserved.
2017-10-05	Judgment delivered.

7. Legal Issues

Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant breached the contract by failing to complete the works by the agreed deadline, providing a defective design, and failing to provide as-built drawings.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Failure to complete works by deadline
  - Defective design and construction
  - Failure to provide as-built drawings
Negligence
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant was negligent in its design and construction of the drainage system, which led to the flooding incidents.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Failure to exercise reasonable care, skill, and diligence
  - Defective design and construction leading to flooding
Implied Terms
- Outcome: The court found that there was an implied term in the agreement that the defendant was to provide other drawings and documents for the Works, including final layout drawings, M&E drawings, and documents such as endorsements by licensed personnel engaged by the defendant, which were necessary for the Fitting-Out Deposit to be released.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Fitness for purpose
  - Duty of care
- Related Cases:
  - [2013] 4 SLR 193

8. Remedies Sought

Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

Breach of Contract
Negligence

10. Practice Areas

Construction Law
Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

Construction
Healthcare

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Sembcorp Marine Ltd v PPL Holdings Pte Ltd and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2013] 4 SLR 193	Singapore	Cited for the three-stage test for the implication of terms in a contract.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Fitting-out works
Drainage system
As-built drawings
Bunded Area
Floor Grating
Defective design
Flooding
Variation works

15.2 Keywords

construction
contract
negligence
singapore
dental clinic
flooding
fitting-out
defective works

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Construction Law	90
Damages	80
Breach of Contract	70
Contract Law	60
Property Damage	50
Building and Construction Related Contracts	50
Contractual Duties	40
Personal Injury	10

16. Subjects

Construction Dispute
Contract Law
Negligence