The head contractor on the Roy Hill project has won two out of five determinations in the latest instalment in its legal dispute with sub-contractor Duro Felguera today, but Samsung C&T was still told to pay Duro $12 million out of more than $60 million that had been sought.
Roy Hill project head contractor Samsung C&T won two out of five determinations in the latest instalment in its legal dispute with sub-contractor Duro Felguera today, but Samsung was still told to pay Duro $12 million out of more than $60 million that had been sought.
Business News reported in July that Duro had suspended ongoing obligations to Samsung after the latter had refused to pay out on five court adjudications totalling $65 million.
The dispute has its roots in the collapse of Forge Group, which had originally been tasked to complete work on a Roy Hill processing plant in a joint venture with Duro.
That led to Samsung and Duro signing a term-sheet agreement overruling parts of the previous contract, leading to confusion as to the relevant jurisdiction for the dispute.
In late June, the Supreme Court found Singaporean arbitration was the appropriate jurisdiction.
On the back of today’s decision, Duro operations director Raul Serrano said it was disappointing the company had had to go to court in order to force Samsung to pay.
“Duro Felguera confirms that the Supreme Court of Western Australia has today ordered that Samsung C&T pay over $12 million in outstanding statutory debts, after it upheld three out of five adjudication applications against Samsung,” Mr Serrano said today.
“Interest has accrued on the outstanding debt for up to 11 months at approximately $2,000 a day.
“As well as upholding Duro’s claim for the outstanding statutory debt, Justice Beech dismissed Samsung’s application for judicial review in relation to three of the five matters.
“His Honour overturned two of the adjudication awards in favour of Duro on the basis that the adjudicators had made errors of law.
“Confidential arbitration continues in Singapore in relation to the substantive disputes between Duro and Samsung.”