Rely on our Construction practice—experienced in all methods of dispute resolution: litigation, arbitration, adjudication and mediation—to provide the full range of legal services in the area of construction and real estate law.
You will be supported by an experienced team during every step of the process, with legal counsel and advisory services from the inception and structuring of projects to contract administration and dispute resolution, including contract drafting for various procurement methods and consultants' agreements, as well as advice pertaining to environmental, land and building control laws.
Benefit from a team comprised of practitioners with a sound legal and commercial understanding of the various complex issues involved in building and construction projects who have distinguished themselves in their successful handling of significant high profile cases, including the inquiry into Singapore's Nicoll Highway collapse.
Whether your business is local or global or anywhere in between, leverage the talent of your team—who are supported by colleagues in more than 50 countries around the world and are ready to assist you around the corner or around the globe.
October 17, 2016
October 7, 2016
The High Court has ruled that a statutory demand based on a judgment pursuant to an adjudication determination made under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (SOPA) can be set aside on the ground that the debtor had a cross-demand which it was pursuing in a separate suit. In the course of its judgment, the court also distinguished between genuine cross-demands to the adjudication determination and defences to the claim in the original adjudication application. Read more
September 7, 2016
In MCST Plan No. 3322 v Tiong Aik Construction Pte Ltd and Another  SGCA 40, the Singapore Court of Appeal (CA) held that architects and main contractors are not subject to a non-delegable duty in tort to ensure that the building and design of the construction project was undertaken without negligence on the part of any of their independent subcontractors. Read more
The plaintiff applied to set aside three arbitral awards. The first was awarded on the merits which was challenged on the basis that the arbitrator had totally failed to consider or understand the plaintiff’s evidence and submissions and therefore, there was a breach of natural justice which prejudiced the plaintiff. The second and third arbitral awards were challenged on the basis that both had been made functus officio – the arbitrator had dealt with the issue of costs in the first arbitral award, but realised he had mistakenly done so and therefore withdrew it in the second arbitral award, and later issued a third arbitral award to deal with costs. Read more
View all Insights for Construction in Singapore