Termination of contractor due to the corruption, unlawful or illegal activities

Abstract

A construction contract can be brought to an end in a various ways either by performance, agreement, frustration or by breach. Normally, termination of contract is a remedy for discharged of contract or put the contract to an end by breach. A contract for government project normally use PWD Form 203A (Rev. 2007). In its effort to eradicate corruption in the construction industry, the government has incorporated an anticorruption clause in the PWD standard form of contract that is Clause 53.0. However, it is silent on the true meaning of the words corruption, unlawful or illegal activities. It can be anything to the ordinary person since there is no clear meaning. It also raise a question whether the clause (without clear definition) is adequate enough for the employer to terminate the contract. The objectives of this research is to determine the meaning of corruption and unlawful or illegal activities and their differences. It is also to determine whether the employer, is entitled to terminate the contract based on Clause 53.0 of PWD Form 203A (Rev. 2007). This research is confined to the Clause 53.0 of PWD Form 203A (Rev. 2007) and the reported English court cases on corruption, unlawful or illegal activities. This research is carried out by analyzing selected court cases. It is found in this research that the meaning of corruption is offences relating to the improper influencing of people in certain position of trust and willing to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain. Meanwhile an unlawful or illegal activity is means by activities commit by a person or a group of person that is forbidden by law. It also pointed out that it is wrong for the employer to terminate the contract under Clause 53.0 of PWD Form 203A (Rev. 2007).