ASSESSING REASONABLE TIME

How does one assess reasonable time, in a way that will not allow the employer to take advantage of its own fault, and also not give the contractor more time than that caused by the employer’s delay?  Guidance was provided recently by the Appellate Division of the Singapore High Court in ICOP Construction (SG) Pte Ltd v Tiong Seng Civil Engineering (Pte) Ltd [2024] SGHC(A) 1. Continue reading “ASSESSING REASONABLE TIME” →

AVOID LAD BY BREACHING THE CONTRACT

From the recent Court of Appeal decision in Rumaya Properties Sdn Bhd v Seacera Development Sdn Bhd [2023] 6 AMR 781, it appears possible to avoid liquidated and ascertained damages (“LAD”) by disabling oneself from performing and breaching the contract. Continue reading “AVOID LAD BY BREACHING THE CONTRACT” →

AFFIRM CONTRACT, LOSE LAD

Affirming a construction contract – instead of terminating it due to the contractor’s delay – resulted in the loss of entitlement to liquidated and ascertained damages (“LAD”).  This was one of the grounds for dismissing a LAD claim in the recent High Court case of  Universiti Tecknologi MARA v Magna Metier Sdn Bhd [2022] 5 AMR 583. Continue reading “AFFIRM CONTRACT, LOSE LAD” →

THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IV – BACK TO THE PAST?

In the recent case of Tekun Nasional Sdn Bhd v Plenitude Drive (M) Sdn Bhd [2021] 8 AMR 427, the Federal Court (“FC“) appears to conflate the concepts under the old and new law as to how section 75, Contracts Act 1950 is to be applied to liquidated damages clauses.

Continue reading “THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IV – BACK TO THE PAST?” →

THE SINGAPORE COVID-19 SOLUTION FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

The Singapore Government has recently passed a law to provide temporary relief to contractors affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, restrictions arising from it (the “COVID-19 event”).  This is the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020 (the “Act”), which deals with a number of topics including construction contracts. Continue reading “THE SINGAPORE COVID-19 SOLUTION FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS” →

THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES III – MORE CONFUSION

This final part of the Cubic Puzzle series highlights further confusion arising from the Cubic case, due to discrepancies between the principles enunciated by the FC and their purported application to the facts. Continue reading “THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES III – MORE CONFUSION” →

THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES II – THE PROPORTIONALITY CONFUSION

Following the Cubic Puzzle I, this post highlights the confusion over what is the test to decide if the agreed amount payable on breach (“damages clause amount”) is “reasonable compensation” under section 75, Contracts Act 1950. Continue reading “THE CUBIC PUZZLE & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES II – THE PROPORTIONALITY CONFUSION” →