Read the full judgment text of Construction List No. 12 of 1993 on BabelCite. This HIGH COURT judgment was delivered on 4 July 1994 before The Hon. Mr. Justice Kaplan.
Construction law — Sub-contract payments — Contract interpretation — Payment as fixed percentage of monies received from Housing Authority — Payment disputes in relation to caissons, concrete walls, and drainage work — Arbitration proceeds and costs sharing — Fluctuation payments — Account deductions and contra charges — Evidence and credibility — The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into 12 sub-contracts in 1977 for housing estate works completed by 1980. The Plaintiff was to be paid a percentage of funds received by the Defendant from the Housing Authority. Disputes arose over whether payments were to be based on Defendant's valuation or actual receipts, measurement and excavation levels of caissons, substitution of concrete walls with brick, fluctuation payment agreements, arbitration proceeds split, and account deductions. The court held the Plaintiff was entitled to payment based on the Defendant's actual receipts, accepted the Defendant's evidence on excavation levels, upheld original measurements of concrete walls, found an oral agreement on fluctuations existed across all sub-contracts, accepted the Plaintiff's evidence supporting a 50/50 split of arbitration proceeds and costs, and validated the deductions and contra charges recorded by the Defendant. A related loan action was discontinued and its terms incorporated. The court ordered the accounts to be recast accordingly and granted liberty to apply for consequential orders including costs.
Legal issues: Interpretation of payment terms for sub-contracts · Caisson excavation measurement and payment entitlement · Payment for concrete walls where substitution of brick walls occurred · Existence and application of fluctuation agreement · Agreement on split of arbitration proceeds and costs · Agreed percentage (85% vs 93%) for drainage works in Phases III and IV · Validity and extent of payments, deductions and contra charges
Outcome: The court decided disputes largely in favour of the Plaintiff, determining payment entitlement based on receipts by the Defendant, upholding fluctuation payments, a 50/50 split of arbitration proceeds, and validating deductions. The loan action was discontinued and its terms incorporated as set-off in the present action.