Not seeing a Scroll to Top Button? Go to our FAQ page for more info. Justin Tan - Adjudications, SOP Act & Construction Law

Justin Tan

Senior Associate

Justin is particularly experienced with the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (the ‘SOP Act’) and has a growing practice in construction law. He has represented clients in adjudications under the SOP Act on many occasions and has made several achievements in this area.

Most recently, Justin appeared before the Court of Appeal for the appellant and successfully reversed the High Court’s decision in Audi Construction Pte Ltd v Kian Hiap Construction Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 165,. In particular, the appeal dealt with issues pertaining to the interpretation of payment clauses and waiver in relation to the SOP Act.

Justin has acted for several contractors in adjudications under the SOP Act. In doing so, he was successful in recovering substantial proportions of his clients' claims, which have cumulatively exceeded sums of seven figures. Justin has also acted for clients in responding to adjudication applications on a number of occasions. He has also given talks on adjudication regarding the SOP Act over the last 3 years.

In 2017, Justin defended his client against a sub-contractor’s lawsuit over allegations of unpaid claims. He successfully resisted the lawsuit and proved that his client had suffered from large losses due to the sub-contractor’s premature termination in G-Art Design & Build Pte Ltd v Hong Xu International Construction Pte Ltd [2017] SGDC 37. Despite the sub-contractor appealing the decision to the High Court, Justin successfully defended the trial judge’s judgment and the sub-contractor’s appeal in the High Court was dismissed.

He has also successfully appeared before the High Court and Court of Appeal for criminal matters. In Chong Han Rui v Public Prosecutor [2016] SGHC 25, Justin appealed to the High Court on behalf of his client, as the co-accused had received a lighter sentence despite sharing equal culpability. CJ Sundaresh Menon allowed the appeal and applied the parity principle – where offenders were similarly culpable, they should receive similar sentences. In addition, CJ Sundaresh Menon highlighted that the parity principle rested on the need to ‘preserve and protect public confidence’ in the administration of justice.

Chong Han Rui v Public Prosecutor [2016] SGHC 25 has now been cited several times in Chua Siew Peng v PP and Anor [2017] SGHC 128; PP v K Saravanan Kuppusamy [2016] SGDC 87; PP v Mohamed Noh Bin Md Sultan [2016] SGDC 78; PP v Koh Ah Chwee [2016] SGDC 77; PP v Chong Mun Moi [2016] SGDC 268; PP v Charlie Chau Kok Leong [2016] SGDC 157.

Justin also appeared before the Court of Appeal in Micheal Anak Garing v PP and Anor [2017] 1 SLR 748; [2017] SGCA 7 to resist the Prosecution’s appeal seeking the death penalty against his client. He was successful in resisting the Prosecution’s appeal and successfully defended the trial judge’s decision to impose the sentence of life imprisonment with 24 strokes of the cane.

Justin graduated from Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London in 2011 with a Second Class Honours (Upper), and was called to the Singapore Bar in 2013.

After Office Hours, Please Call (65) 8700 9933.