[1999] SGHC 168

In the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

[1999] SGHC 168

Suit 2033/1997

Between

The Ngee Ann Kongsi

… Plaintiff

And

The Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited

… Defendant

grounds of decision

This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports.

The Ngee Ann Kongsi v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited

[1999] SGHC 168

Suit 2033/1997
Goh Joon Seng J
28 June 1999

1 JUDGMENT:

2 GROUNDS OF

JUDGMENT

4 The parties

8 The facts

12 7 Condition 9 of the Letter of Award stated:

"NOW THE GUARANTOR HEREBY AGREES with the Employer as follows:-… "

"(a) Phase I – Renovation Works 21 March 1996(b) Phase II – PUB Substation 21 November 1996(c) Phase III – Lift Shafts and Motor Room 5 January 1997(d) Phase IV – All RemainingWorks 21 May 1997"

S$1,369,500.00

… "

20 The proceedings

24 "Losses, Damages, Costs and Expenses

26 My decision

27 Bocotra Construction Pte Ltd v A-G (No. 2) [1995] 2 SLR 733

four

principles may be extracted:(a) The ‘autonomy’ principle(b) The ‘cash in hand’ principle(c) The ‘fraud’ exception(d) …

"(b) Nature of unconditional or ‘on demand’ undertakingdue payment

29 21 In Bocotra Construction Pte Ltd v A-G (No. 2)

31 Bocotra Construction Pte Ltd v A-G (No. 2) supra).

In holding it to be a demand bond, Ackner LJ said at 549:

37 At 569-570, Morison J stated:

"Support may also be found in two Australian cases. In the first, Australasian

Conference Association Ltd v Mainline Constructions Pty Ltd (in liq)Wood Hall Ltd

v Pipeline Authority

39 GOH JOON SENG

40 JUDGE

Goh Joon Seng J

Ho Chien Mien / Earl Allan Trevor (Allen & Gledhill) for the plaintiff
Brij Raj Rai / Gavin Khoo / Nagaraja Maniam (Rajah & Tann) for the defendant