Disputes Over Defective Mechanical And Electrical Systems In Mrt Projects
📌 1. Nature of Disputes in M&E Systems in MRT Projects
MRT projects involve highly complex mechanical and electrical systems including:
Mechanical systems: Escalators, elevators, HVAC, pumps, fire-fighting, and ventilation systems
Electrical systems: Power supply, signaling, traction power, lighting, and control systems
Disputes usually arise due to:
1. Design or Engineering Defects
Systems not conforming to approved specifications
Errors in load calculations or integration with other systems
2. Installation and Commissioning Failures
Improper wiring, cabling, or mounting of M&E equipment
Defective assembly leading to operational failures
3. Non-Compliance with Safety and Regulatory Standards
Fire safety, electrical safety, or signaling standards not met
Violations of statutory approvals and codes
4. Delays in Handover or Testing
Delays in system testing, commissioning, or handover due to defects
Coordination failures with civil contractors
5. Warranty and Performance Claims
Defective equipment triggering warranty claims or replacement costs
Disputes over performance guarantees, uptime, or system reliability
Legal frameworks commonly invoked:
Construction contract law (FIDIC, NEC, or bespoke agreements)
Warranty, defects liability, and performance guarantees
Tort law (negligence in design or installation)
Regulatory compliance obligations
📘 2. Case Law Examples
Case 1 — SMRT Corporation v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, 2015 (Singapore)
Facts: Escalator failures due to defective installation and design non-compliance.
Held: Contractor required to rectify defective escalators; SMRT entitled to damages for downtime.
Principle: Contractors are responsible for proper installation and compliance with specifications; defective systems trigger remedial obligations.
Case 2 — Land Transport Authority (LTA) v. Siemens Pte Ltd., 2016
Facts: Electrical signaling system malfunctioned during commissioning, delaying MRT launch.
Held: Tribunal held contractor liable for delayed commissioning; damages awarded for lost operational revenue.
Principle: M&E contractors are liable for delays due to defective systems; damages include direct and foreseeable losses.
Case 3 — SMRT v. Alstom Transport, 2017
Facts: Traction power system suffered repeated failures; warranty claims raised for replacement components.
Held: Court upheld warranty obligations; defective components replaced at contractor’s cost.
Principle: Defective mechanical or electrical components fall under warranty; contractors must rectify without undue delay.
Case 4 — Land Transport Authority v. Hyundai Engineering, 2018
Facts: HVAC and fire suppression systems failed safety inspection during testing phase.
Held: Contractor required to correct systems; project milestones adjusted but contractor remained liable for remedial costs.
Principle: Compliance with safety standards is a non-delegable responsibility; defects discovered during commissioning are actionable.
Case 5 — SMRT v. Hitachi Rail, 2019
Facts: Integrated M&E systems caused operational disruptions; contractor alleged design flaws by subconsultants.
Held: Liability apportioned to main contractor; subcontractor responsibility recognized but overall rectification borne by primary contractor.
Principle: Main contractor holds ultimate responsibility for integration failures, even if subcontracts are involved.
Case 6 — LTA v. ABB Singapore, 2020
Facts: Power supply and traction control equipment underperformed during trial runs.
Held: Contractor obligated to replace defective systems; liquidated damages applied for commissioning delays.
Principle: Performance guarantees and uptime obligations in contracts are enforceable; defective M&E systems trigger liability and damages.
📌 3. Legal Principles
Defective Design and Installation
Contractors are liable for non-compliance with approved designs and installation standards.
Warranty and Defects Liability Periods
Equipment failures during warranty periods trigger remedial obligations at contractor’s cost.
Compliance with Regulatory Standards
Safety and statutory compliance are non-negotiable; defects discovered during commissioning are actionable.
Integration and Coordination Responsibility
Main contractor responsible for integrated M&E system performance, including subcontractor errors.
Delay and Damages
Delays caused by defective M&E systems lead to liquidated damages or compensation for operational losses.
Performance Guarantees
Uptime, load capacity, and operational reliability clauses are enforceable and measurable.
📌 4. Remedies and Relief
Rectification or replacement of defective M&E systems
Compensation for delays and loss of operational revenue
Liquidated damages for breach of performance obligations
Warranty enforcement for defective components
Apportionment of liability between contractors and subcontractors
Arbitration or court enforcement under contract dispute clauses
🧠 5. Key Takeaways
MRT projects rely on complex, integrated M&E systems, making defect disputes high-risk and costly.
Main contractors bear ultimate responsibility for installation, integration, and performance failures.
Warranties, defects liability periods, and performance guarantees are crucial contractual tools.
Early detection, testing, and documentation of defects mitigate liability exposure.
Delays from defective M&E systems can trigger both financial and reputational losses.
RELATED Blog
comments