Contract LawGovernment ContractsSecurity ServicesTender Process
legislation
Statutes Cited
Private Investigators and Security (Control) Act
Procurement Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the plaintiff could unilaterally vary the contract price based on new government regulations without written agreement as required by the contract","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Contract contained non-variation clause; no written variation executed; plaintiff continued services"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the defendant was liable to pay the difference between the contract rate and the gazetted rate","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Government regulations increased tariffs; defendant paid original rate only"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The plaintiff provided security services to the defendants under a government tender contract at US$23,554.30 per month. When government regulations increased security guard tariffs, the plaintiff claimed the new rate of US$50,551.70 per month without written variation as required by the contract. The defendants continued paying the original rate and the contract was terminated in September 2011.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases