Security of Payment Legislation—Case of a Blunt but Practical and Equitable Instrument

In the modern world, some traditions are falling faster than others. The threat to end the legal concept of freedom of contract may be realized sooner than expected with the statutory interference of not only consumer contracts but contracts between nonconsumers. The family of security of payment legislation, beginning from the United Kingdom has been adopted by New South Wales and now in Singapore, regulates a business-to-business contract to facilitate progress payment in the construction industry by introducing statutory adjudication to resolve disputes producing the effect of nonpayment. The struggle between two parties, one with a right to demand payment and the other with the right to withhold payment because of his right to set-off and counter-claim, is examined in light of the new legislation called the Singapore Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004. Having examined specific provisions of the Act and the experience of New South Wales—as Singapore has no relevant case law, it is concluded that the Act is a blunt but practical and equitable instrument to achieve its intention.