Page 5 - บทคัดย่อเล่ม 3

1

ค ำชี้ขำดเกี่ยวกับสัญญำจ้ำงท ำของ
1. Case No. (Red) 76/ 2554

Issues to be determined : 1) Which party breached the Contract?
2) Whether or not the Respondent terminated the Contract rightfully?

3) Is there any additional work under the Contract?
4) Whether Claimant has received money from Respondent in the

total sum of Baht 52,877,905.09?
5) Which party is entitled to damages and how much?

After taking examination, the Arbitral Tribunal found, however, that it was Respondent

who failed to make advance payment in monthly interim payments to Claimant. Nothing indicated that
Claimant was not in the good financial standing. Accordingly, Respondent failed to prove that Claimant

breached the Contract. The Arbitral Tribunal, on the other hand, was satisfied by the evidence provided
and facts established by Claimant that Respondent was the one who breached the Contract. For the

second issue, the Arbitral Tribunal found that it was accepted by both parties that Respondent had
issued three warning notices on June 15, 22, 2007 and September 17, 2007 respectively. Moreover, On
July, 2 0 0 7 , Claimant issued a letter demanding Respondent to swiftly affect the payment for both

advance payment and progress payment not later than July, 2007. On September 18, 2007, Claimant
issued another letter to Respondent demanding for the payment of all outstanding amounts otherwise

it would terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 14 of the Contract. The Arbitral Tribunal is of
the opinion that this letter of Claimant “…plainly demonstrates the intention not to continue

performance of his obligations under the Contract” under Article 1 3 . 2 ( b) of the Contract. Accordingly,
Respondent was entitled to terminate the Contract as provided in Article 1 3 . 2 . Therefore, this Arbitral

Tribunal decides that Respondent terminated the Contract rightfully. For the third issued There was
additional work done by Claimant, which was claimed by Claimant as Additional Work. This Additional
Work was approved by Representative of Respondent. This additional work was the excavation and

jacking of stone for the construction of the basement and the moving out of soil and stone. This work
had to be done because Respondent changed the marked elevation in the Phase II of the Project. The

size was estimated to be 450 m2 the ground was to be lowered down to the level of 115.00 metres.
The volume of the earth to be excavated was estimated to be 2,393.13 m3. The total charge for this