JCW

Justin and Alvin were the counsel for the second respondent/defendant in the Court of Appeal. The appeal was decided in favour of the second respondent/defendant. This is a case involving a claim in respect of the construction of a dam where the Pre-Tender Agreement was signed between parties. The Court of Appeal held that an invitation to participate in the joint venture to submit the tender, on its own, did not create a contractual relationship between the appellant/plaintiff and the first and second respondents/defendants. It was merely an invitation for a discussion and negotiation which culminated in the preparation and signing of the pre-tender agreement between parties. Further, the parties were not allowed to adduce evidence to contradict and vary the Pre-Tender Agreement under Section 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act 1950. The Court of Appeal also re-affirmed the principle of law that a party who seeks the court’s intervention to pierce the corporate veil must establish special circumstances to show that the company is a mere façade concealing the true facts.