CGS Construction v Quek & Quek: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination under SOPA
In CGS Construction Pte Ltd v Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore dismissed Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd's application to set aside an adjudication determination in favor of CGS Construction Pte Ltd. The dispute arose from a payment claim for construction work related to the Operation and Maintenance of Landfill Equipment, Vehicles and Floating Platform at Semakau Landfill. The court found that there was a contract in writing for the purposes of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004, that a valid payment claim was served, and that the work fell within the definition of construction work under the Act.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Building and Construction Law
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an adjudication determination under SOPA, concerning a dispute over payment for construction work.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGS Construction Pte Ltd | Claimant | Corporation | Application dismissed | Won | |
| Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Kwek Mean Luck | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd was the main contractor for the Operation and Maintenance of Landfill Equipment, Vehicles and Floating Platform at Semakau Landfill.
- Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd subcontracted the entire works to CGS Construction Pte Ltd.
- The SMK3 Works were completed by CGS Construction Pte Ltd around 28 February 2023.
- CGS Construction Pte Ltd initiated the process for adjudication pursuant to SOPA in AA 68.
- The main determination made in the AD is that Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd shall pay to CGS Construction Pte Ltd the sum of $1,633,173.93 (including GST) as the adjudicated amount.
5. Formal Citations
- CGS Construction Pte LtdvQuek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd, Originating Application No 438 of 2024, Summons No 1388 of 2024, [2024] SGHC 183
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| SMK3 Works completed by CGS | |
| Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd sent a letter enclosing its final accounts to CGS Construction Pte Ltd | |
| CGS Construction Pte Ltd made a payment claim | |
| Quek & Quek Civil Engineering Pte Ltd sent a payment response | |
| Adjudication Determination dated | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Contract in Writing for SOPA Purposes
- Outcome: The court found that there was a contract in writing for the purposes of SOPA.
- Category: Substantive
- Validity of Payment Claim
- Outcome: The court found that CGS served a payment claim within the ambit of SOPA.
- Category: Procedural
- Definition of Construction Work
- Outcome: The court found that the SMK3 Works are construction work within the meaning of SOPA.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside the Adjudication Determination dated 23 April 2024
9. Cause of Actions
- Setting aside adjudication determination
10. Practice Areas
- Construction Law
- Commercial Litigation
- Arbitration
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hiap Seng Building Construction Pte Ltd v Hock Heng Seng Contractor Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 50 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that the adjudicator in AA 68 did not have threshold jurisdiction to make an adjudication determination. |
| Lee Wee Lick Terence v Chua Say Eng | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 401 | Singapore | Cited for the observation that the New South Wales Building and Construction Security of Payment Act 1999 has a similar structure and purpose to SOPA. |
| Qingjian International (South Pacific) Group Development Co Pte Ltd v Capstone Engineering Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] SGHCR 5 | Singapore | Cited to show that the communications in writing include written quotations. |
| Sungdo Engineering & Construction (S) Pte Ltd v Italcor Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 459 | Singapore | Cited to show that there is no express declaration that it is a PC under SOPA, the document appears to be of a nature different from a payment claim under SOPA and there is earlier correspondence that creates confusion over whether CGS 29 Feb 24 is a PC. |
| Progressive Builders Pte Ltd v. Long Rise Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 689 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that an excessive technical approach should not be adopted in assessing compliance with the requirements of s 10(4) of SOPA. |
| Metropole Pte Ltd v Designshop Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 277 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that the purpose of SOPA is to allow for quick determination. |
| SEF Construction Pte Ltd v Skoy Connected Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 733 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that the purpose of SOPA is to allow for quick determination. |
| Futurepower Development Pty Ltd v TJ & RF Fordham Pty Ltd | New South Wales Supreme Court | Yes | [2017] NSWSC 232 | Australia | Cited to support the principle that the purpose of SOPA is to allow for quick determination. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004
- SOPA
- Adjudication Determination
- Payment Claim
- Construction Work
- Semakau Landfill
- Land Reclamation
15.2 Keywords
- Construction Law
- SOPA
- Adjudication
- Payment Claim
- Construction Work
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Construction Law | 95 |
| Adjudication | 90 |
| Construction | 60 |
| Arbitration | 50 |
| Breach of Contract | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Construction Dispute
- Adjudication
- Contract Law