ARKI-TECH INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v RENTAK TEBRAU SDN BHD
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Chan Seng Onn |
| Charges / claim | Contract, Building and Construction Law |
| Counsel | Twenty Essex Chambers, Withers KhattarWong LLP, Yusarn Audrey LLC, Farahna Alam, Jessica Cheng Yi Ling, Lee Soong Yan, Kelvin (Li Chong'En), Tan Hui Teng, Tan Spring, Wong Yu Rong Tatiana, Zephan Chua Wei En |
Source: [2025] SGHC 233, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (10)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHC 233 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 26 November 2025 concerning Building and Construction Law and Contract, specifically addressing formation, contractual terms, and building and construction contracts. The judgment was delivered by Chan Seng Onn. The case was brought by Arki-Tech International Pte Ltd (plaintiff) against Rentak Tebrau Sdn Bhd (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Withers KhattarWong LLP and Twenty Essex Chambers. The judgment cites 15 cases (13 Singapore, 2 foreign) and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Evidence Act.
[2025] SGHC 233 explained
ARKI-TECH INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v RENTAK TEBRAU SDN BHD ([2025] SGHC 233) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 26 November 2025. It is categorised under Contract and 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 [2025] SGHC 233 about?
ARKI-TECH INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v RENTAK TEBRAU SDN BHD ([2025] SGHC 233) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Contract — Formation — Certainty of terms”, “Contract — Contractual terms — Rules of construction”, and “Building and Construction Law — Building and construction contracts — Management contracts”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHC 233 consider?
The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
Arki-Tech International sued Rentak Tebrau for unpaid fees under a development management agreement for a proposed hotel and convention centre development in Johor, claiming 20% of all cost savings from value engineering services. The court allowed the claim in part, ruling that Arki-Tech was entitled to payment at $350 per hour for all work done but not to the 20% cost savings, as it had not obtained the required board approval for its value engineering proposals.
What was decided in [2025] SGHC 233?
[2025] SGHC 233 (ARKI-TECH INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v RENTAK TEBRAU SDN BHD) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 26 November 2025 addressing Building and Construction Law and Contract, specifically formation, contractual terms, and building and construction contracts. The judgment was delivered by Chan Seng Onn.
Who were the parties in ARKI-TECH INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v RENTAK TEBRAU SDN BHD ([2025] SGHC 233)?
The plaintiff in [2025] SGHC 233 was Arki-Tech International Pte Ltd, and the defendant was Rentak Tebrau Sdn Bhd. Legal representation included Twenty Essex Chambers and Withers KhattarWong LLP. The case was decided on 26 November 2025 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 233?
[2025] SGHC 233 was delivered by Chan Seng Onn in the High Court (General Division) on 26 November 2025. The case concerned Building and Construction Law and Contract.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 233 cite?
[2025] SGHC 233 cites 15 prior decisions, including 2 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Evidence Act.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (15)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 233)