Management Corporation v Exceltec: Breach of Contract in Building Management

Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3724 sued Exceltec Property Management Pte Ltd in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore, alleging breach of contract for failing to properly maintain a grease trap at Jurong Food Hub. The plaintiff claimed damages for the cost of manual removal and maintenance of a temporary grease trap installation and the cost of installing a new grease trap system. The defendant counterclaimed for outstanding management fees. The court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and awarded judgment to the defendant on its counterclaim.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; judgment for Defendant on counterclaim.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Strata Title Plan sued Exceltec for breach of contract regarding grease trap maintenance. The court dismissed the claim and awarded judgment to Exceltec on its counterclaim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3724PlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost
Exceltec Property Management Pte LtdDefendantCorporationJudgment on CounterclaimWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuSenior JudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Siaw Kheng BoonSiaw Kheng Boon & Co
Tanmanjit Singh Sidhu s/o Karam Jeet SinghRamdas & Wong
Jawharilal BalachandranRamdas & Wong

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff engaged the defendant as the managing agent for Jurong Food Hub.
  2. The management contract required the defendant to maintain the building.
  3. A grease trap system in the building was not properly maintained, leading to blockages and flooding.
  4. The plaintiff alleged the defendant failed to maintain the grease trap, breaching the management contract.
  5. The plaintiff replaced the grease trap system at a cost of $241,796.00.
  6. The defendant counterclaimed for $24,161.30 in outstanding management fees.
  7. The court found the defendant had a duty to maintain the grease trap but the plaintiff failed to prove causation.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3724 v Exceltec Property Management Pte Ltd, Suit No 20 of 2020, [2022] SGHC 44

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Defendant incorporated.
Defendant appointed as managing agent of JFH by EL Development (Jurong) Pte Ltd.
Plaintiff constituted under the Land Titles Strata Act.
Plaintiff took over management of JFH from the Developer.
Management Contract between Plaintiff and Defendant signed.
Plaintiff's second Annual General Meeting took place.
Council members detected an overpowering stench emitting from the Grease Trap.
Plaintiff held a council meeting.
Defendant submitted two quotations to the plaintiff to repair the Grease Trap.
Mr. Ahmad sent a summary of quotations for the repair of the Grease Trap to council members.
Mr. Ahmad informed the plaintiff that he would proceed to accept Red Power’s quotation.
Plaintiff appointed Vinco Real Estate Management Pte Ltd to take over as managing agent.
Goodwill flushed out the flooded Grease Trap.
Vinco reported Goodwill’s findings to the plaintiff at its council meeting.
Goodwill's report was dated.
Plaintiff's solicitors sent a letter of demand for the return of the plaintiff’s books of accounts, records and other documents.
Defendant replied to letter of demand.
Defendant's solicitors issued a letter of demand to the plaintiff for the outstanding management fees.
Plaintiff's solicitors disputed liability.
Plaintiff engaged CC Building Surveyors Pte Ltd to carry out a survey of the Grease Trap.
CCBS rendered a report to the plaintiff.
Goal Link Pte Ltd rendered a report assessing the suitability of the equipment and machinery of the grease plant.
Plaintiff sent a letter of demand to the defendant giving notice that the plaintiff would be taking the necessary steps to investigate and rectify the problem of the Grease Trap.
Plaintiff's solicitors stated it had obtained a quotation from RJS Engineering Consultancy Services in the total sum of $600,000.
RL notified the plaintiff that it had received four tenders for the new grease trap system.
L-ONYX was awarded the contract.
Plaintiff commenced Suit No 20 of 2020 against the defendant.
Trial began.
Trial date.
Trial date.
Trial date.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that while the defendant had a contractual duty to maintain the Grease Trap, the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant's breach caused the flooding incident.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to maintain property
      • Failure to exercise reasonable skill and care
  2. Causation
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant's breach of contract caused the flooding incident on 30 April 2014.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Implied Duties
    • Outcome: The court held that implied duties should not apply in this case because there are express contractual provisions and no gaps or lacuna in the Management Contract.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
CAA Technologies Pte Ltd v Newcon Builders Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2017] 2 SLR 940SingaporeCited for the principle that implied duties should not apply where there are express contractual provisions and no gaps or lacuna in the Management Contract.
Sembcorp Marine Ltd v PPL Holdings Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2013] 4 SLR 193SingaporeCited for the principle that implied duties should not apply where there are express contractual provisions and no gaps or lacuna in the Management Contract.
Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming EricCourt of AppealYes[2007] 3 SLR(R) 782SingaporeCited for the application of the 'but for' test to determine causation in contract cases.
Yip Holdings Pte Ltd v Asia Link Marine Industries Pte LtdUnknownYes[2012] 1 SLR 131SingaporeCited for the principle that the plaintiff is claiming for more compensation that what it was entitled to at law.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
Land Titles Strata Act Cap 158Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Grease Trap
  • Management Contract
  • Managing Agent
  • Maintenance
  • Flooding
  • Jurong Food Hub
  • Strata Title
  • Blockage
  • Ejector Pump
  • Sump Pump
  • Desilting

15.2 Keywords

  • breach of contract
  • management corporation
  • managing agent
  • grease trap
  • maintenance
  • building management
  • singapore
  • civil suit

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Management contracts85
Breach of Contract80
Construction Law75
Contract Law70
Property Law20
Company Law20

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Building and Construction Law
  • Property Management