Bintai Kindenko Private Limited v Samsung C&T Corporation

Bintai Kindenko Private Limited v Samsung C&T Corporation

The adjudicator expressly confined the dispute to the release of the first half of the retention monies and did not consider the separately pleaded and repeatedly argued issues of backcharges and variation works; that deliberate exclusion of central issues was a breach of natural justice which was material because...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] SGHC 321
Parties
Applicant (enforcement of Adjudication Determination): Bintai Kindenko Pte Ltd; Respondent (applicant to Set Aside Adjudication Determination): Samsung C&T Corp
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
19 December 2017
Case Number
HC/OS 975/2017 ( HC/SUM 5421/2017,HC/DRI 92/2017,HC/DRO 142/2017,HC/DRI 68/2017,HC/SUM 4276/2017 )
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (enforcement of Adjudication Determination); Interlocutory Summons to Set Aside Adjudication Determination / High Court Judgment on Application to Set Aside Adjudication Determination
Outcome
Application allowed; adjudication determination set aside.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Adjudication Determination, Enforcement of Adjudicator's Determination, Breach of Natural Justice, Retention Monies, Backcharges, Variation Works
Source Language
english
Building and Construction Law Dispute Resolution Adjudication Administrative Law Setting Aside Adjudication Determination Enforcement of Adjudicator's Determination Breach of Natural Justice Retention Monies +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bintai Kindenko Pte Ltd

Applicant (enforcement of Adjudication Determination)

Samsung C&T Corp

Respondent (applicant to Set Aside Adjudication Determination)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (enforcement of Adjudication Determination); Interlocutory Summons to Set Aside Adjudication Determination / High Court Judgment on Application to Set Aside Adjudication Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator considered backcharges and variation works raised by the parties
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator’s omission to consider those issues amounted to a breach of natural justice
  3. 3 Whether any breach was material and caused prejudice warranting setting aside the adjudication determination

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator expressly confined the dispute to the release of the first half of the retention monies and did not consider the separately pleaded and repeatedly argued issues of backcharges and variation works; that deliberate exclusion of central issues was a breach of natural justice which was material because the disputed sums exceeded the adjudicated claim, and therefore the adjudication determination was set aside.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; adjudication determination set aside.

Orders

  • Adjudication Determination dated 15 August 2017 set aside.
  • Costs fixed at $10,000 (all-inclusive) to be paid by Bintai Kindenko Pte Ltd to Samsung C&T Corp.