Singapore: Construction Standards and Codes of Practice – The Significance of Compliance and Non-Compliance

Last Updated: 8 February 2012
Article by Subramanian Pillai and Victor Fernandez

Architects, Engineers and Contractors rely on Standards and Codes of Practice to serve as a guide in the execution of their design and workmanship obligations. Standards or Codes of Practice, in effect, act as a codified version of the cumulative knowledge and technical expertise within the building and construction industry.

In Singapore, the Building and Construction Authority, pursuant to the Building Control Regulations (the "Regulations"), has issued the Approved Document of Acceptable Solutions (the "Approved Document"). The Approved Document specifies the preferred standards for different aspects of design and construction works which are deemed to meet the prescribed objectives and performance requirements in Singapore for design, material and construction. It is significant that the Approved Document cites both the British Standard and the Singapore Standard.

Since Standards or Codes of Practice can be said to reflect the best practices and cumulative knowledge of the construction industry over a period of time, one may argue that in a situation where a construction professional fails to follow these Standards or Codes of Practice, it will amount to a clear cut case of negligence and therefore, he should be held accountable for any damage to his employer or to third parties resulting from the defective design or workmanship.

However, in the recent case of Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 2757 v Lee Mow Woo (practising under the firm of Engineers Partnership) [2011] SGHC 112, the High Court accepted the argument that this might not always be the case.

In this case, the plaintiff was the management corporation of an industrial development known as Northlink Development (the "Development"). The Development consisted of three light industrial buildings (the "Building"). The defendant was the Consultant Engineer for the Development.

The plaintiff commenced legal proceedings against the defendant arguing that the defendant was negligent in the design of the Building and this has resulted in defects which required to be rectified. One of the alleged defects was in the area of the expansion joints and the surrounding areas.

The main issue to be determined by the Court was whether the design of the corbel/beam configurations at the expansion joints and the surrounding areas was defective.

The plaintiff took the position that the design was negligent since it did not comply with the requirements of the British Standards Institution's Code of Practice BS 8110:Part 1:1985 ("the Code").

On the other hand, the defendant took the position that the Code only serves as a guide and non-compliance per se does not ipso facto render the design inadequate. The defendant argued that what was important was that the design was safe based on engineering principles.

The High Court, taking into account the evidence presented by the parties' respective expert witnesses, found that the design was inadequate to handle the stresses that the corbel/beams would be subjected to.

However, it is important to note that the Court recognized that non-compliance with the Code does not, by itself, mean that the design was inadequate. In that situation, the burden lies with the designer to prove that his design was safe by applying accepted principles of engineering. In this respect, the Court observed as follows:-

"Nevertheless, I accept the defendant's contention that non-compliance with the Code does not, in itself, mean that the Design is inadequate. Both experts accepted that the Code represents cumulative engineering knowledge over a long period. It would follow that even though there is no strict requirement to comply with the Code, nevertheless, a design that is in compliance with it can generally be assumed to be safe. On the other hand, if a design does not comply with the Code, the designer would have to satisfy himself that it was safe by applying accepted principles of engineering"

Accordingly, in a case where a design does not comply with the Code, any "presumption" that the designer was negligent may be rebutted by proof that the design was still safe based on established and accepted engineering principles.

Whilst Standards or Codes of Practice may reflect the best practices of the industry at a given point in time, it is accepted that there may be several ways of doing things. As the creative and innovative boundaries of architectural and engineering design and construction are continually pushed, a certain level of indulgence may be allowed so as to encourage creativity and innovation as long as the design and construction works are safe and grounded on established and accepted architectural, engineering or construction principles.

Here, it is significant to note that the Regulations recognize this flexibility in the interest of innovation and creativity. The Regulations provide that the Commissioner of Building Control may issue approved documents setting out the specifications, materials, designs or methods of construction (the "acceptable solutions") which shall be deemed to comply with relevant objectives and performance requirements for the design of buildings in Singapore. However, the Regulations state that this is without prejudice to any alternative means of achieving compliance. Thus, it would appear that the Regulations also recognize that the acceptable solutions for the design and construction of buildings are not exhaustive.

One important question that is raised in this context is whether an Architect, Engineer or Contractor may be found negligent in the event that his design or construction fails notwithstanding that he has fully complied with the Code or any other acceptable Standard of design or construction. The answer to this query may eventually hinge on the particular facts of each case.

At the onset, the general rule is that the standard of care required of a designer or contractor is that he should exercise reasonable skill and care in the exercise of his duties.

On the issue of professional negligence, it is important to consider the "Bolam test" as set out in the case of Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 W.L.R. 582 HL. Under the Bolam test, the standard for professionals is not that of a person possessing the highest expert skill, but that of an ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill.

Since Standards or Codes of Practice contain the cumulative knowledge and technical expertise in a given field, it may be argued that compliance with Standards or Codes of Practice is sufficient to absolve an Architect, Engineer or Contractor from liability.

However, the Bolam test has been slightly modified by the "Bolitho addendum" which was introduced in the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. Under the Bolitho addendum, the Court also has to be satisfied that the body of opinion relied upon by the professional has a logical basis and in the event that the opinion does not stand up to a logical analysis, a Court is entitled to exercise its discretion and rule that the opinion is not reasonable. In Bolitho, the House of Lords held that:-

"These decisions demonstrate that in cases of diagnosis and treatment there are cases where, despite a body of professional opinion sanctioning the defendant's conduct, the defendant can properly be held liable for negligence (I am not here considering questions of disclosure of risk). In my judgment that is because, in some cases, it cannot be demonstrated to the judge's satisfaction that the body of opinion relied upon is reasonable or responsible. In the vast majority of cases the fact that distinguished experts in the field are of a particular opinion will demonstrate the reasonableness of that opinion. In particular, where there are questions of assessment of the relative risks and benefits of adopting a particular medical practice, a reasonable view necessarily presupposes that the relative risks and benefits have been weighed by the experts in forming their opinions. But if, in a rare case, it can be demonstrated that the professional opinion is not capable of withstanding logical analysis, the judge is entitled to hold that the body of opinion is not reasonable or responsible."

Following Bolitho, it is possible to argue that certain Standards or Codes of Practice may be wanting in terms of logical analysis. In such an event, strict compliance with the Standards or Codes of Practice may not absolve the Architect, Engineer or Contractor from liability for any defect in the design or workmanship.

The Singapore Court of Appeal recently adopted the Bolitho addendum in the case of JSI Shipping (S) Pte Ltd v Teofoongwonglcloong (a firm) [2007] SGCA 40. There, the Court observed that "[t]he Bolitho addendum merely affirms the supervisory judicial responsibility to ensure, at a minimum, that the expert opinion is defensible and grounded in logic and plain common sense."

Given that Standards or Codes of Practice are said to reflect the cumulative engineering knowledge and collection of opinion or best practices formulated over a period of years, it is arguable that the ruling in the cases of Bolitho and JSI Shipping would likewise be applicable in cases where an Architect, Engineer or Contractor is alleged to be negligent in the design or construction of works and he raises the defence that he has strictly complied with the recognized and accepted Standards or Codes of Practice.

It is submitted that, in such an instance, the Court is still free to exercise its discretion in determining whether the Standards or Codes of Practice relied on are based on sound logic and plain common sense. If the Court finds that the Standard or Codes of Practice relied upon are not capable of withstanding such logical analysis, the Court may still find that such reliance does not absolve an Architect, Engineer or Contractor from negligence in the design and construction of the works.

Whilst it is admitted that challenges to established Standards or Codes of Practice within the Construction Industry will be very rare, it is still important for constructions professionals and contractors to ensure that their creative and innovative design and construction works are based on sound and rational engineering practices that will stand up to scrutiny. The main objective must always be that the design and construction works are safe and fit for the purpose for which they are designed or built irregardless of whether there has been compliance with the applicable Standards or Codes of Practice.

This update is provided to you for general information and should not be relied upon as legal advice.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions