BPM109 Contract Administration Tutor-Marked Assignment 2, 2026 | SUSS

BPM109 Tutor-Marked Assignment Two

This assignment is worth 14% of the final mark for BPM109 Contract Administration.

The cut-off date for this assignment is 30 March 2026, 2355 hrs.

Note to Students:

You are to include the following particulars in your submission: Course Code, Title of the TMA, SUSS PI No., Your Name, and Submission Date.

Collusion and Plagiarism is a serious offence and your Turnitin report will be examined thoroughly as part of the marking process. All works from other authors must be appropriately cited and listed in a bibliography – failure to comply with proper referencing measures will be penalised.

Question 1 Background

On 10 April 2024, a government-linked agency (the Client) issued a tender to a select group of pre-qualified contractors for the restoration and adaptive reuse of an existing historic building in Singapore. This project involved extensive structural strengthening, façade restoration, and internal fit-out to convert the building into a modern arts and exhibition space.

Pinnacle Construction Pte Ltd (PCL) and Grand Heritage Builders Pte Ltd (GHB) were among the pre-qualified contractors who responded to the tender. They received the tender documents, which included the Invitation to Tender, Tender Form, detailed architectural and structural drawings, heritage preservation specifications, and other tender information.

On 30 June 2024, the tender closed. After a thorough evaluation process, the contract was awarded to GHB. PCL, despite submitting the lowest bid, subsequently expressed strong dissatisfaction with the outcome and threatened legal action against the Client, alleging an “unfair” evaluation process and a “misjudgement” in the award.

GHB, who submitted the second lowest bid, was to complete the complex restoration project within 18 months from the commencement date of 1 September 2024. The contract was valued at SGD$120 million, with monthly progress payments to GHB based on certified work done. A Superintending Officer (SO) was appointed as the contract administrator for this project.

As the Client’s Contracts Manager, you assist the SO in ensuring all procedures and requirements of the Public Sector Standard Conditions of Contract (PSSCOC) 2020 are strictly adhered to. 

Your Task

With reference to the case above, answer the following questions in the context of the PSSCOC and general contract law in Singapore. You are not expected to copy and paste clauses from the PSSCOC; you may cite the clauses and explain their essence in your own words to support your answers.

(a) In the context of contract law in Singapore, explain whether PCL’s tender submission constituted a binding offer to the Client. If not, why not? Discuss whether PCL would be successful in any legal action against the Client concerning the tender award process.

Support your answer with relevant legal principles and, if applicable, relevant case law concerning invitations to treat and tender awards.

(20 marks)

(b) During the façade restoration works, GHB unexpectedly encountered extensive hidden dry rot and termite infestation within the original timber structural elements of the historic building. This issue was not evident from the pre-tender building surveys provided by the Client. Addressing this required specialised timber treatment, structural reinforcement, and additional work at significant extra cost.

GHB immediately wrote to the SO, detailing the unforeseen conditions, including their cost and time implications. However, this was rejected by the SO, as the SO believed the Contractor, being responsible for the works, should have anticipated such risks in a restoration project.

Assuming GHB duly provided written notice to the SO within the required timeframe as per PSSCOC, discuss whether GHB would be successful in their claim for additional payment and EOT. Provide reasons based on PSSCOC provisions regarding unforeseen physical conditions.

If successful, what specific relief (e.g. types of compensation, impact on contract time) would GHB be entitled to under PSSCOC?

(20 marks)

(c) Based on the scenario in (b), the specialised dry rot treatment and timber reinforcement methods are new and unique, with no equivalent items or rates in the contract. Additionally, the exact quantity of affected timber cannot be measured until the work is actively underway due to the nature of the infestation’s spread. Advise the SO on the appropriate valuation method and the payment procedure for this work.

(20 marks)

(d) Shortly after the structural strengthening phase, the SO instructed GHB to omit the specified installation of a large, custom-built glass skylight from the contract. The original contract sum included a significant allowance for this specific skylight.

Discuss whether GHB has the right to object to such an instruction. Explain the SO’s powers to issue such an instruction under PSSCOC.

If GHB later discovers that the omitted skylight was subsequently awarded by the Client to another specialist contractor at a significantly lower price than the original contract allowance, discuss what actions GHB should take to protect their contractual interests. Support your answer with relevant PSSCOC clauses and general legal principles regarding omissions.

(20 marks)

(e) The project specified the use of custom-fabricated, heritage-grade roof tiles supplied by a specialist artisan workshop in Thailand (Heritage Tiles Co.). The tiles were to be delivered to Singapore in three shipments. After the first shipment was delivered to GHB’s site and duly installed, an unexpected political unrest in Thailand severely disrupted transport logistics, causing a significant delay to the second and third shipments.

GHB refuses to issue payment to Heritage Tiles Co. for the first shipment of tiles, arguing that they themselves have not yet received payment from the Client for the supply and installation of these tiles, and the overall project is now facing delays due to the disrupted supply chain. The supply contract between GHB and Heritage Tiles Co. stipulates payment within 30 days of delivery on-site.

Discuss whether GHB is contractually entitled to withhold payment for the first shipment of roof tiles, given the delay in the subsequent shipments and their own payment status.

Explain the general principle of ‘Pay When Paid’ clauses in supply contracts under Singapore law and whether such a clause, if present, would alter your advice.

(20 marks)

—- END OF ASSIGNMENT —-

The post BPM109 Contract Administration Tutor-Marked Assignment 2, 2026 | SUSS appeared first on Singapore Assignment Help.