Developers have always had the right to contractual remedies in respect of building defects that are attributable to design (the responsibility of designers) and/or workmanship and materials (the responsibility of builders) both during the construction stage as well as the defects liability period that follows the completion of the works for a fixed period of time. After the expiry of the defects liability period, a developer is usually entitled to monetary compensation only if they suffered a loss. In Chia Kok Leong v. Prosperland Pte Ltd 1 which adopted the decisions in two English cases, namely, St Martins Property Corporation Ltd v. Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd 2 and Alfred McAlpine Construction Ltd v. Panatown Ltd ,3 the Singapore Court of Appeal decided that a developer is entitled to substantial damages from both the architect and the contractor even if the developer did not suffer any loss. This surprised the architect who had challenged the decision given by the High Court but lost.

The other development concerns the reclassification of building defects from one of physical damage to one of pure economic loss under the law of negligence. The upshot of the change was the raising of the bar against a successful claim to such a high level that a subsequent purchaser was hardly able to recover from the builder and/or designer. In Singapore, however, the management corporation, which is a creature of statute comprising all the subsidiary proprietors in a condominium development in charge of the maintenance of the common property of the development, was held to have a right to claim from both the developer and the architect for pure economic loss in the form of the cost of repair of the building defects found in the common property.