[2011] SGHC 82

“of 18 months under the LOI to determine the reasonable time for completion. The plaintiff submits that this was the approach adopted in Fongsoon Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd [2011] SGHC 82 (“Fongsoon”), and this court should not depart from that approach. In the final analysis, the plaintiff a”

“of prevention, and the absence of an extension of time clause in the LOI, the relevant time for completion had been set “at large”: see Fongsoon Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd [2011] SGHC 82 (“Fongsoon”) at [24]–[25]. Jurong Primewide was thus liable to complete the Project within a “reasonable”

“actual obligation will be set at large and the defendant has to pay the plaintiff within a reasonable time, which is a question of fact: Fongson Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd [2011] SGHC 82 at [25].”

“In determining what is a reasonable time for completion, we can draw guidance from two cases. In Fongsoon Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd [2011] SGHC 82 (“Fongsoon”), the court held at [25]:”