If there was no payment response, is an adjudicator bound to accept the sum put up by a claimant as the amount due to the claimant? Can the adjudicator use his own technical expertise to determine the amount which should be payable to the claimant? What remedies are available to a party who is dissatisfied with an adjudication determination? Should he ask for a review and abide by the outcome? Or should he take it up further to the High Court?
The speaker will discuss the recent decisions of the High Court on the setting aside of adjudication determinations:  Chip Hup Hup Kee Construction Pte Ltd v Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co Ltd and Doo Ree Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd v Taisei Corporation".

In Chip Hup Hup Kee Construction Pte Ltd v Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co Ltd [2009] SGHC 237, Judith Prakash J noted at [37] that the Singapore Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act is based on the New South Wales Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999.   
It has been observed in Australia that the New South Wales Act “has led to a spate of litigation in its relatively short life”: John Holland Pty Ltd v Roads & Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 19 at [65], per Basten JA. A substantial body of case law has developed in this area. The paper will focus on cases (including appellate decisions) which are of practical significance for legal advisors and adjudicators in Singapore.