CALPEDA ASIA PACIFIC PTE LTD v CHEW CONSTRUCTION & PLUMBING PTE. LTD.

[2023] SGHC 102 High Court (General Division) 18 April 2023 HC/S 913/2021 35 min read
2 cases cited (1 SG, 1 foreign)

Key facts

Court High Court (General Division)
Decided
Judge Kwek Mean Luck
Charges / claim Building and Construction Law
Counsel Ethos Law Corporation, Rajwin & Yong LLP, Debbie Lee, Oh Kim Heoh Mimi, Rajwin Singh Sandhu

Source: [2023] SGHC 102, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (5)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

CALPEDA ASIA PACIFIC PTE LTD v CHEW CONSTRUCTION & PLUMBING PTE. LTD. [2023] SGHC 102 was decided in the General Division of the High Court by Kwek Mean Luck J on 18 April 2023 in Suit No 913 of 2021. Calpeda, which supplied and installed pumps across five building construction projects, claimed $683,147.92 from the subcontractor Chew Construction & Plumbing, which counterclaimed $683,664.73. The case concerned whether the outstanding sums for each project were due and payable and whether Calpeda had satisfied its work obligations, raising issues of damages for defects, delay in completion, maintenance duties and defect liability provisions.

[2023] SGHC 102 explained

CALPEDA ASIA PACIFIC PTE LTD v CHEW CONSTRUCTION & PLUMBING PTE. LTD. ([2023] SGHC 102) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 18 April 2023. It is categorised under Building and Construction Law. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGHC 102 about?

CALPEDA ASIA PACIFIC PTE LTD v CHEW CONSTRUCTION & PLUMBING PTE. LTD. ([2023] SGHC 102) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Building and Construction Law — Damages — Damages for defects”, “Building and Construction Law — Damages — Delay in completion”, “Building and Construction Law — Contractors’ duties — Maintenance”, and “Building and Construction Law — Subcontracts — Claims by subcontractor”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 102 consider?

The judgment refers to Civil Law Act (Cap 43). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

Calpeda Asia Pacific Pte Ltd claimed $683,147.92 from Chew Construction & Plumbing Pte Ltd for supplying and installing pumps across five building projects, while Chew Construction counterclaimed $683,664.73 for alleged defects and delay. The dispute turned on whether the outstanding sums were due and whether Calpeda met its work obligations. Kwek Mean Luck J allowed Calpeda's claim in full with interest, dismissed the counterclaim, and ordered the $200,000 lodged in court released to Calpeda.

What was Calpeda Asia Pacific v Chew Construction & Plumbing [2023] SGHC 102 about?

It was a construction dispute in Suit No 913 of 2021 where Calpeda claimed $683,147.92 for supplying and installing pumps across five projects, and Chew Construction & Plumbing counterclaimed $683,664.73, raising issues of defects, delay, maintenance duties and defect liability provisions.

Who decided Calpeda Asia Pacific v Chew Construction & Plumbing and when ([2023] SGHC 102)?

Kwek Mean Luck J heard the matter in the General Division of the High Court over several days in January and March 2023, reserving judgment and delivering it on 18 April 2023 in Suit No 913 of 2021.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (2)

SLR (1)
[1994] 1 SLR(R) 505
UK (1)
[2002] 1 AC 122

Related cases

Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.

Referenced in

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC 102)