Security Of Payment Issues raised from Adjudication Determinations Edwin Lee Partner, Rajah & Tann 2 August 2007 1 Presentation Overview The Security of Payment (SOP) Act came into effect on 1 April 2005. As at 8 February 2007, there are about 26 adjudications applications lodged, with 21 adjudication determinations made. Most of the issues that have arisen in the adjudication deal with certain requirements imposed by the SOP Act and can be categorised into the following. 2 1
Issues From The Adjudication Determinations Jurisdiction Requirements: Would the SOP Act apply to the Claimant s payment dispute/claim? Procedural Requirements Has the Claimant/Respondent complied with the procedural requirements of the SOP Act? Form Requirements Has the Claimant/Respondent omitted any details or information as required under the SOP Act? 3 Issues From The Adjudication Determinations Not complying with the requirements of the SOP Act would affect the Claimant s rights to make a successful claim or the Respondent s rights to raise a set-off or counterclaim. 4 2
Jurisdiction Requirements Some issues to consider before filing an adjudication claim Contract is made in writing Contract is made on or after 1st April 2005 Contract is carried out for project / site in Singapore Contract is for construction work as defined in the SOP Act. 5 Whether SOP ACT would apply Section 4 of SOP Regulations 2005 Any contract which satisfies the following conditions shall be excluded from the application of the Act: (a) the contract is made, in writing, within a period not exceeding 6 months from 1st April 2005; (b) the contract is a sub-contract made under a main contract; and (c) the main contract is made before 1st April 2005. 6 3
Whether SOP ACT would apply In other words, SOP Act applies to sub-contracts If main and sub-contract are made on or after 1 April 2005, If main contract is made before 1 April 2005, but subcontract is made on or after 1 October 2005. What does the word made mean? 7 What does the word made mean? Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 Employer engaged Respondent as main contractor for a business park project before 1 April 2005. Main Contract between Respondent and Employer was not signed until 4 July 2005. Respondents employed the Claimants by way of letter of award dated 30 May 2005 ( sub-contract ) to carry out reinforced concrete works for the price of S$5,259,995. However, works commenced from March 2005. 8 4
What does the word made mean? Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 On 20 August 2006, Claimant submitted a progress claim to the Respondent claiming for the sum of S$342,043.26 for work done. Respondent did not provide a payment response to the progress claim. On 22 September 2006, Claimant lodged an adjudication application with SMC. 9 What does the word made mean? Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 In the adjudication response, Respondent submitted that the subcontract was not governed by the SOP Act as the: (a) The 1st Minutes of Meeting with the Employer was dated 7 January 2005; (b) Notice of Registration of Factory issued by the Ministry of Manpower was dated 18 February 2005; (c) The Claimant had submitted its 1st progress claim on 31 March 2005; and (d) The Claimant received certification of its 1st progress claim from the Employer s consultants for the month of March 2005. 10 5
What does the word made mean? Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 The Adjudicator noted that the word made, as provided under section 4 of the SOP Regulations 2005 was not defined in the Act or the Regulations. While he accepted that the Main Contract may have come into existence before 1 April 2005, he concluded that the Main Contract was made on 4 July 2005 by both parties and therefore was not excluded by the SOP Regulations. 11 What does the word made mean? Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 - Therefore, the adjudicator has suggested that made means the the date when parties signed the contract. - Comment: Should the approach be so simple? 12 6
Whether SOP ACT would apply Scenario: Whether a payment dispute for construction services entirely carried out in Singapore but for a project overseas could be referred to adjudication under the SOP Act? Under section 4(2) of the SOP Act This Act shall not apply to (b) any contract to the extent that (ii) it deals with construction work carried out outside Singapore, or goods or services supplied in relation to construction work carried out outside Singapore; 13 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/03 of 2006 Claimant was engaged by the Respondent to provide concept design services for the construction of a retail mall and hotel in Indonesia on 7 February 2006. The work was commissioned, completed and finally delivered to the Respondent in Singapore. 14 7
Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/03 of 2006 The Claimant sought to claim for $45,000 for the work done under the SOP Act. In the adjudication, the Claimant submitted that their concept design work was done independently and well before there was any construction work done in Indonesia. 15 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/03 of 2006 The adjudicator determined that under the SOP Act, it was clear that it excludes the supply of good or services involving construction work outside Singapore. - While the supply goods or services may have been commissioned, carried out or delivered in Singapore, the SOP Act would exclude any claims arising from contracts or projects outside Singapore. 16 8
Whether SOP ACT would apply Scenario: Whether termination of contract would prevent the Claimant from referring payment dispute to adjudication under the SOP Act? (not provided for in SOP Act) Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/10 of 2006 Claimant was engaged by the Respondent to provide architectural and civil & structural services for a lump sum of around S$1million. 17 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/10 of 2006 Payment was based on the completion of services for different stages of work provided by the Claimant. The Contract was terminated on 6 July 2006. The Claimant was not fully paid for the work done then, and made a claim of S$366,786 under the SOP Act. The Respondent issued its payment response, where they accepted that the Claimant was entitled to payment, but only for S$80,514. 18 9
Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/10 of 2006 In their adjudication response, the Respondent raised the issue that the contract had been terminated before the submission of the payment claim and suggested that the SOP Act only applies during the subsistence of the contract. The adjudicator determined that the SOP Act would still apply even after a contract is terminated, the reasons being: 19 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/10 of 2006 The intention of the SOP Act to protect the cash flow of the claimant would not have been achieved if the termination of the contract would prevent a claim. If cash flow is blocked on one project, it would affect a contractor or service provider s financial resources for other projects. Also, while the termination of the contract terminates the right to be paid for work which would have been done in the future, it continues to govern the relationship between the parties in relation to the work that has already been done. 20 10
Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/10 of 2006 - Therefore, a payment dispute/claim can still be submitted for adjudication for the work already done under the contract even though it has been terminated. 21 Whether SOP ACT would apply Scenario to ponder: Whether Claimant can refer final payment/accounts to adjudication - There appears to be no restriction against a claim for final payment or accounts. - Claim, whether final or not, is for work already done under the contract. 22 11
Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/11 of 2006 From October 2005, Claimant was engaged by the Respondent as sub-contractor for piling works for proposed erection of a block of 5-storey building with mezzanine. While progress payments were made for sub-contract works, there was dispute over whether socketting works were inclusive of the sub-contract or treated as variation. On 15 May 2006, Respondent rejected Claimant s claim for socketting works and issued final accounts for subcontract work, where balance due was about $71,914.63. 23 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/11 of 2006 During June 2006, parties tried to resolve the outstanding amount payable by negotiations and meetings. On 20 July 2006, Claimant submitted Payment Claim for $174,781.04 ($102,643.20 for socketting works and $72,137.84) No Payment Response by Respondent and Adjudication Application was filed. 24 12
Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/11 of 2006 Adjudicator held that $43,961.99 was the amount due to the Claimant under the sub-contract works. On the issue of socketting works, the Adjudicator stated that it is an on-going dispute about possible variation and final accounts. He was of the view that these are matters that can not be dealt with under the provisions of the [SOP] Act. Further, he stated that while the aim of the SOP Act was to solve cash flow problems, it cannot resolve every payment issue. 25 Whether SOP ACT would apply Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/11 of 2006 The Adjudicator also felt that the Claimant could not just disregard the entire event that had taken place (final accounts) and simply raise the Payment Claim in the hope that it would be dealt with and disposed of under the SOP Act. He determined that the issue of socketting works was not within the scope of the SOP Act and advised the parties to seek an expert professional engineer s help to resolve the outstanding matters. Comment: Is this correct? 26 13
Procedural Requirements Tight time lines. Adjudication is a swift and rough determination of the parties disputes. The whole adjudication process takes about 1 month. Parties stand to lose their rights under the SOP Act if they do not comply with the timelines for submission of the relevant documents. 27 Procedural Requirements - Timelines which the Claimant/Respondent need to look out for Payment Claim Payment Response Dispute Settlement Period last day of month 7 days, up to 21 days 7 days 28 14
Procedural Requirements - Timelines which the Claimant/Respondent need to look out for Adjudication Application / Notice of Intention Adjudication Response Adjudication Determination Adjudication Review 7 days 7 days 7 days, or 14 days 7 days 29 Payment claim - Scenario: Whether more than one payment claim can be served in respect of a progress payment? Section 10(1) of SOP Act A claimant may serve one payment claim in respect of a progress payment on (a) one or more other persons who, under the contract concerned, is or may be liable to make the payment; or (b) such other person as specified in or identified in accordance with the terms of the contract for this purpose. 30 15
Payment claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 Claimant contracted with Respondent to supply labour, tools, timber and plywood for construction and completion of Bifurcation Viaduct Structure for the construction of roads to semi expressway. Claimant served more than one payment claim in respect of the disputed progress payment. In the adjudication response, Respondent submitted that section 10(1) of the SOP Act implies that only one payment claim should be served in respect of a progress payment. 31 Payment claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 Adjudicator determined that the Claimant is not precluded from submitting more than one payment claim for the same progress payment, as long as it remains unpaid. He was of the view that section 10(4) of the SOP Act specifically states that section 10(1) does not prevent the Claimant from including in a payment claim, an amount that was the subject of a previous payment claim served in relation to the same contract which has not been paid by the Respondent. 32 16
Payment Response Importance of Payment Response As section 15(3) of the SOP Act states, The Respondent shall not include in the adjudication response, and the adjudicator shall not consider, any reason for withholding any amount, including but not limited to any cross-claim, counterclaim and set-off, unless the reason was included in the relevant payment response provided by the respondent to the claimant 33 Payment Response Section 11 of SOP Act 11. (1) A respondent named in a payment claim served in relation to a construction contract shall respond to the payment claim by providing, or causing to be provided, a payment response to the claimant (a) by the date as specified in or determined in accordance with the terms of the construction contract, or within 21 days after the payment claim is served under section 10, whichever is the earlier; or (b) where the construction contract does not contain such provision, within 7 days after the payment claim is served under section 10. 34 17
Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/02 of 2006 As there was NO payment response and NO adjudication response, Claimant was awarded their full claim. In the absence of the payment response as well as the adjudication response, the Adjudicator was not provided any reasons by the Respondent not to award the claimed amount. - What if the payment response was served, albeit out of time? 35 Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 As referred before, the Claimant agreed to supply labour, tools, timber and plywood for construction and completion of Bifurcation Viaduct Structure for the construction of roads to semi expressway. It was only after the dispute settlement period that the respondent submitted a payment response. 36 18
Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 On referring the payment dispute to adjudication, the Claimant contended that the payment response was invalid being filed out of time and could not be considered under section 15(3) of the SOP Act. Respondent argued that section 15(3) of the SOP Act does not state that if the payment response was served out of time, the Adjudicator is precluded from considering the adjudication response and its documents. 37 Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 Adjudicator disagreed with the Respondent s argument and determined that a late payment response is similar to no payment response. Therefore, section 15(3) of the SOP Act would apply. He reasoned that the SOP Act has very stringent timelines with respect to the due dates of payment claims and response. 38 19
Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/13 of 2006 As the intention of the SOP Act is to ensure speedy payment for work done and improve the contractor s cash flow, the Adjudicator held that the relevant payment response has to be made in accordance to the time frame allowed for in the SOP Act. 39 Form Requirements Has the Claimant or Respondent omitted any details or information as required under the SOP Act? Payment Claim Payment Response Adjudication Application / Notice of Intention Adjudication Response 40 20
Payment Claim Section 10(3) of SOP Act A payment claim (a) shall state the claimed amount, calculated by reference to the period to which the payment claim relates; and (b) shall be made in such form and manner, and contain such other information or be accompanied by such documents, as may be prescribed. 41 Payment Claim Specific Requirements Section 5(2) of SOP Regulations 2005 Every payment claim shall (a) be in writing; (b) identify the contract to which the progress payment that is the subject of the payment claim relates; and (c) contain details of the claimed amount, including (i) a breakdown of the items constituting the claimed amount; 42 21
Payment Claim Specific Requirements (ii) a description of these items; (iii) the quantity or quantum of each item; and (iv) the calculations which show how the claimed amount is derived. 43 Payment Claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/07 of 2006 The Claimant submitted the adjudication application based on an invoice to the Respondent, which was to be the payment claim under the SOP Act. In the invoice, it had stated and made reference to other 2 previous invoices (already issued) which had not been paid as well. As it was in the form of an invoice, the sum stated was for $60k only. Claimant sought payment of more than $200k for the three invoices. 44 22
Payment Claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/07 of 2006 Adjudicator had to determine whether the invoice fulfilled the requirements of a payment claim under the SOP Act, and the quantum of the claimed amount. Respondent submitted that the invoice was not a valid payment claim, as it was not in a form identifiable as a payment claim under the SOP Act. (It was expected that a usual payment claim would be by correspondence or report) 45 Payment Claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/07 of 2006 The Adjudicator determined that the invoice had fulfilled the requirements of a payment claim under the SOP Act. As such, it was a valid payment claim. However, he held that the claimed amount could not have been for the total sum owed (even though it referred to other tax invoices) as it was a tax invoice which only represented the balance sum. Therefore, the Claimant was entitled to the sum as stated in the third tax invoice of $60k. 46 23
Payment Response Section 11(3) of SOP Act A payment response provided in relation to a construction contract (a) shall identify the payment claim to which it relates; (b) shall state the response amount (if any); (c) shall state, where the response amount is less than the claimed amount, the reason for the difference and the reason for any amount withheld; and (d) shall be made in such form and manner, and contain such other information or be accompanied by such documents, as may be prescribed. 47 Payment Response Specific Requirements Section 6(1) of SOP Regulations 2005 Every payment response provided in relation to a construction contract shall (a) be in writing; (b) be addressed to the claimant; (c) state nil where the respondent does not propose to pay any part of the claimed amount and the reasons therefor; and (d) where the response amount is less than the claimed amount 48 24
Payment Response Specific Requirements (i) contain the amount that the respondent proposes to pay for each item constituting the claimed amount, the reasons for the difference in any of the items and the calculations which show how the amount that the respondent proposes to pay is derived; and (ii) contain any amount that is being withheld, the reason for doing so and the calculations which show how the amount being withheld is derived. 49 Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2007 Claimant were engaged by the Respondents to fabricate, supply and install architectural works for a project. On December 2006, Claimant submitted their payment claim of $145k. The Respondent claimed that a letter which they wrote to the Claimant during the Response period qualified as a Payment Response. However, the letter: did not identify the Payment Claim. did not state any sums or amount due to the Claimants. did not put any clear reasons, if any, for the difference or reasons for any amount withheld. 50 25
Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2007 In referring the payment dispute to adjudication, the Claimant submitted that the letter by the Respondent could not be considered as a proper payment response. In particular, the Respondent should have indicated nil if they had intended to make no payment to the Claimant. 51 Payment Response Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2007 The adjudicator held that the Respondent s letter could not be treated as a payment response. He determined that the Respondent s letter was not an assessment of the Claimant s payment claim and did not provide any reasons for non-payment. In essence, it did not fulfil the requirements of a payment response under the SOP Act. 52 26
Notice of Intention Section 7(1) of SOP Regulations 2005 7. (1) Every notice of intention to apply for adjudication shall contain the following particulars: (a) the names and service addresses of the claimant and the respondent; (b) the date of the notice; (c) the particulars of the relevant contract, comprising (i) the project title or reference, or a brief description of the project; 53 Notice of Intention (ii) the contract number or a brief description of the contract; and (iii) the date the contract was made; (d) the claimed amount; (e) the response amount (if any); and (f) a brief description of the payment claim dispute. 54 27
Notice of Intention Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2006 Claimant relied on letter dated 19 January 2006 as the notice of intention to refer the payment claim dispute to adjudication. On adjudication, the Adjudicator determined that the said letter did not include the particulars required in section 7 of SOP Regulations 2005. 55 Notice of Intention Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2006 In particular, the adjudicator highlighted the concluding paragraph, if [they] do not hear from [the Respondents] tomorrow, [they] will not hesitate to instruct [their] solicitor to take necessary action to recover payment from [the Respondent s] company. 56 28
Notice of Intention Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/01 of 2006 The Adjudicator was of the view that there was no express reference or intimation by the claimants that they intended to refer the dispute to adjudication. As section 13(2) of the Act states, an adjudication application shall not be made unless the claimant notified the Respondent of their intention to apply for adjudication of the payment claim dispute Therefore, the Claimant s adjudication application was held to be premature and failed. 57 Adjudication Application It s all about the details. Section 13(3) of SOP Act An adjudication application (d) shall be accompanied by such application fee as may be determined by the authorised nominating body; and (e) may contain or be accompanied by such other information or documents (including expert reports, photographs, correspondences and submissions) as the claimant may consider to be relevant to the application. 58 29
Adjudication Application Section 7(2) of SOP Regulations 2005 Every adjudication application shall (a) contain the names and service addresses of the claimant, the respondent, the principal (if known) and the owner concerned; (b) state whether the relevant contract is a construction contract or a supply contract; (c) contain the particulars of the relevant contract, comprising (i) the project title or reference, or a brief description of the project; 59 Adjudication Application (ii) the contract number or a brief description of the contract; and (iii) the date the contract was made; (d) contain an extract of the terms or conditions of the contract that are relevant to the payment claim dispute; and (e) be accompanied by a copy of the relevant notice of intention to apply for adjudication, a copy of the relevant payment claim and a copy of the payment response (if any) thereto. 60 30
Adjudication Application Do not Forget! On the day of submission to Singapore Mediation, before 4 pm. Enclose cheque for administrative fee - $500 plus GST; and adjudicator s fee $2k plus GST if claimed amount < $20k 5% of claimed amount plus GST if claimed amount >$20k. 61 Adjudication Application - A small error can defeat your claim Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 As discussed before, Claimant was employed by the Respondent to carry out reinforced concrete works for a business park for a certain lump sum amount. On 20 August 2006, Claimant submitted progress claim of $337,773.51 for work done. Upon receiving no payment response to their progress claim, the Claimant lodged an adjudication application with SMC. 62 31
Adjudication Application Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 Claimed Amount indicated in adjudication application was $334,043.75. Payment claim attached in the adjudication application showed another amount which was $342,043.26. In the Adjudication Response, the Respondents submitted that the adjudication application was improper and/or defective and/or inaccurate because there were three different claimed amounts. 63 Adjudication Application Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 Respondent argued that they were prejudiced because they did not have the opportunity to check the payment claim (which was different from the one submitted to them) annexed to the adjudication application. Claimant countered with the argument that while it was a mistake on their part, they had submitted the payment claim of $342,043.26 earlier and were told to revise the amount due to take account some deductions. They then resubmitted their payment claim of $337,773.51. 64 32
Adjudication Application Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 The adjudicator agreed that the adjudication application was defective for the following reasons: The adjudication application must state the claimed amount and also be accompanied by the relevant payment claim. The payment claim should be the one which the adjudication application relates. If the wrong payment claim is annexed to the adjudication application, it is defective. 65 Adjudication Application Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/15 of 2006 Where the amounts differ between the claimed amount in the adjudication application and the payment claim to which it relates, the claimant should explain why the claimed amount differs from the payment claim. While the Claimant submitted that as in court proceedings, the error in the figures could be amended, the adjudicator rejected such submission and determined that the defect cannot be cured by an amendment as the SOP Act did not allow or provide for amendments to be made in an adjudication application. 66 33
Adjudication Response Section 15(2) of SOP Act The adjudication response (a) shall be made in writing addressed to the authorised nominating body; (b) shall identify the adjudication application to which it relates; (c) shall contain such information or be accompanied by such documents as may be prescribed; and 67 Adjudication Response (d) may contain or be accompanied by such other information or documents (including expert reports, photographs, correspondences and submissions) as the respondent may consider to be relevant to the adjudication response. 68 34
Adjudication Response Specific Requirements Section 8 of SOP Regulations 2005 8. (1) Every adjudication response shall (a) refer to the relevant adjudication application by the adjudication application reference number assigned by the authorised nominating body; (b) where the contract that is the subject of the payment claim dispute is a sub-contract, contain the date the main contract is made; 69 Adjudication Response (c) contain details of the response amount (if any); and (d) where the respondent intends to supplement the relevant payment response, contain the additional computations and justifications. 70 35
Adjudication Response - Consequence of NO Payment Response and NO Adjudication Response submitted Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/06 of 2006 The adjudicator held that the Claimant succeeded in their full claim of $209,640.54 because in the absence of any payment response or adjudication response, he had no grounds to reject the rates adopted by the Claimants in their variation claims. 71 Adjudication Response - Where NO Payment Response (or was submitted late) but there was an Adjudication Response (on merits) Adjudication Application SOP No: AA/18 of 2006 Adjudicator held that he was bound to give effect to section 15(3) which excluded him from considering the arguments in the Adjudication Response as the section specifically states that the adjudicator is to exclude reasons not found in the payment response. 72 36
Adjudication Response However, even where there s NO Payment Response and Late Payment Response, Respondent is still entitled to raise legal issues in the Adjudication Response, such as - Jurisdiction (as discussed previously), - Procedural defaults (also discussed previously), and - Principles of natural justice can still be raised. 73 Conclusion As seen in the many examples above, failure to comply with the strict requirements of the SOP Act (whether substantive, procedural, or in form) may be potentially fatal to a genuine claim/defence. Care must be taken in preparing the payment claim and response and to ensure strict compliance with the timelines and requirements of the SOP Act. 74 37
SOP Act - Other Practical Considerations Costs of Adjudication Proceedings Whether includes Legal Costs. Withdrawal of Adjudication Application 75 Costs of Adjudication Proceedings - Where the Claimant is successful in the adjudication application, the adjudication fees are usually borne by the Respondent. Section 30(1) of SOP Act The costs of any adjudication shall not exceed such amount as may be prescribed by the Minister. (2) An adjudicator shall, in making his determination in relation to any adjudication application, decide which party shall pay the costs of the adjudication and, where applicable, the amount of contribution by each party. 76 38
Costs of Adjudication Proceedings - There is no clear provision in the SOP Act that legal costs can be recovered. - Under Section 12 of SOP Regulations 2005, costs of adjudication proceedings only specify - The fee payable to the authorized nominating body; and - The fee payable to the adjudicator. 77 Withdrawal of adjudication applications and adjudication review applications Section 20(1) of SOP Act An adjudication application may be withdrawn by the claimant at any time upon serving a notice of withdrawal on (a) the adjudicator; (b) the authorised nominating body which appointed the adjudicator; and (c) the respondent. 78 39
Withdrawal of adjudication applications and adjudication review applications (2) An adjudication review application may be withdrawn by the respondent at any time upon serving a notice of withdrawal on (a) the review adjudicator or the panel of review adjudicators, as the case may be; (b) the authorised nominating body which appointed the review adjudicator or the panel of review adjudicators, as the case may be; and (c) the claimant. 79 Withdrawal of adjudication applications and adjudication review applications Impact on Costs Section 31(4) of SOP Act Where an adjudication application is withdrawn or terminated or the dispute between the claimant and the respondent is settled, the adjudicator is entitled to be paid the fees and expenses incurred in relation to the adjudication up to, and including, the date on which the adjudication application is withdrawn or terminated or the dispute is settled, as the case may be. 80 40
Withdrawal of adjudication applications and adjudication review applications Impact on Costs (5) For the purposes of subsection (4) (a) in the case of the withdrawal of an adjudication application, the applicant shall be liable to pay the fees and expenses of the adjudicator; and (b) in any other case, the parties to the adjudication shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the fees and expenses of the adjudicator. 81 Withdrawal of adjudication applications and adjudication review applications - Impact on costs If Adjudication Application is withdrawn before Adjudication Response is filed, deposit made for adjudicator s fee is likely to be returned, while authorized nominating body may impose a fee for the service of adjudication application. 82 41
Lessons from Adjudication Determinations - Q & A 83 THANK YOU For more information, please contact: Edwin Lee Tel: +65 6232 0664 Email: edwin.lee@rajahtann.com Website: http://www.rajahtann.com 84 42