Lee Swee Seng J:

[1] The exact nature of the contractual relationship between an employer and a nominated subcontractor ("NSC") is often more than meets the eyes. Various mechanisms have been explored by an NSC to ensure, if not, secure payments for work contractually done for its main contractor including some direct payment arrangements where the employer would pay directly to the NSC.

[2] When that is not done and the NSC discovered that the main contractor had nevertheless been paid or had gone into liquidation, it is natural for the NSC to explore making a claim against the employer as it happened here. The NSC staged its claim under breach of representations and warranties given by the employer to it and even under a collateral contract to pay. Alternatively, it tried to claim under quantum meruit under s 71 Contracts Act 1950 .

[3] The employer in turn counterclaimed against the NSC for damages arising out of the damage done to an adjacent building and to delay occasioned by the NSC arising out of what it said is the NSC's negligence. That raises an interesting question as to whether an NSC owes a duty of care in tort to the employer when all three parties had worked o