Part 10A of COTMA was passed by parliament on 11 May 2021 and commenced operation on 6 August 2021.
It provides a statutory framework for a party in a construction contract who has incurred an increase in foreign manpower salary cost due to the Covid-19 pandemic to apply for an adjustment of the contract sum.
Parties who intend to apply for relief under Part 10A should take note of these important dates:
What is a downstream sub-contractor’s recourse if the upstream main contractor gives only oral instructions for variation works although the subcontract requires written instructions?
What are the implications to a downstream sub-contractor if it decides to carry out variation works based only on the main contractor’s oral instructions? Will it have a right to claim for additional payment?
These are frequently encountered issues in the construction arena, and they arose for the High Court’s consideration in this case.
Range Construction Pte Ltd v Goldbell Engineering Pte Ltd  SGHC 1919 (“Range Construction”)
Decision Date: 10 Sept 2020
Range Construction Pte Ltd (“RC”) was Goldbell Engineering Pte Ltd’s (“GE”) contractor.
RC obtained an adjudication determination in its favour against GE.
However, RC was dissatisfied with the adjudicator’s decision to allow GE’s claim for liquidated damages of $852,000.00.
RC applied to the High Court (“HC”) set aside the adjudication determination. One of the grounds relied on by RC was that the adjudicator did not have the power to determine GC’s claim for liquidated damages.
The HC disagreed with RC’s contention and dismissed the application. In doing so the HC briefly commented on Section 17 (2A) of the SOP Act. This appears to be the first reported observations on Section 17 (2A) which came into effect on 15 December 2019. We will discuss this aspect of the HC’s decision in this post.