If Bai Ying ands Seah Ling agreed to ask an expert from the construction industry to settle the matter for them, this expert, called an arbitrator, shall be required to be like a judge in assessing each party's case. According to the Arbitration Act, when there is an agreement to let an arbitrator decide on how to settle this dispute between Seah Ling and Bai Ying, the decision by the arbitrator shall have the same power as a court decision (what these powers cover is discussed below).

As a neutral person, the arbitrator asked to decide this matter would want to give Bai Ying a chance to state his case within a reasonable time, say, 2 weeks. In our situation, Bai Ying's written defence (and maybe a counterclaim) should at least have the following points.

1. Whether Bai Ying agrees with Seah Ling regarding how the agreement was made. If not, he should state his version of how they had agreed on the $10,000 for the 2,000 pieces of marble tiles. For instance, Bai Ying may point out the Seah Ling had verbally promised that the marble tiles would look the same as the samples which Bai Ying had seen at Seah Ling's showroom.
2. How did Seah Ling fail to fulfill his promise to deliver 2,000 pieces of marble tiles? For example, 500 pieces of the white marble tiles looked like they had green stains (patches) after they were laid on the floor of Bai Ying's house.
3. What did Bai Ying do upon seeing the 500 damaged tiles? Let's say that he contacted Seah Ling, and asked Seah Ling for a solution. Suppose, also, that Seah Ling offered to replace 500 tiles if a surveyor (i.e.. an expert on building materials) confirmed that the tiles were inferior to those in Seah Ling's showroom. However, the surveyor's report was inconclusive. The stains could have been caused by a different substance which was used by Bai Ying's contractors to lay the 500 affected tiles when they had run out of the substance that was used to lay the other 1,500 tiles. They could also be caused by the fact that the marble chosen by Bai Ying was not sufficiently waterproofed; as a result the area where the 500 affected tiles was laid was especially wet with water running below Bai Ying's house. Seah Ling's suggestion was to deliver another 500 pieces of the same tiles at $2.50 a piece, half the original (per piece) price agreed between them. Bai Ying rejected the offer and proceeded to order another 2,000 pieces of higher grade marble tiles from another supplier at $11,000.00. He now counterclaims for the full price of the new tiles from Seah Ling.

After each side has submitted their individual writtenstatements, the neutral party "judging" the case willhave to develop a plan and a time-table to arrange for Seah Ling'sand Bai Ying's individual point of view to develop: one by one, asin a chess game. A simplified example of how a neutral umpire'stime-table for the contesting parties will look is as follows:-

1. Seah Ling's case (following the written points of claim) starts first. Bai Ying's answer (based on the defence and counterclaim) will follow.
2. The evidence for Seah Ling is presented: who were witnesses and if there are documents which support Seah Ling's version. After that, it is Bai Ying's turn to show his evidence (witnesses, documents etc).
3. In closing, how Seah Ling's evidence supports his story is summarised and argued. Right after Seah Ling's closing summary, Bai Ying's turn follows.

An arbitrator's reasoning of the case may be as follows.

1. Undeniably, Seah Ling did deliver 2,000 pieces of marble tiles as agreed.
2. There is some doubt regarding the 500 pieces of tiles which were stained: the stains could have resulted from the marble's poor quality as much as the poor workmanship in laying the tiles.
3. However, Bai Ying was wrong in refusing to pay the balance. He also over-reacted in ordering 2,000 new pieces when Seah Ling had additional stocks of the same tiles. (This reasoning will probably be more convincing if it turns out that the 500 stained pieces of marble tiles were laid at the store-room or some more remote corner of Bai Ying's house.) Bai Ying's counterclaim is dismissed.
4. Allowing Bai Ying the benefit of the doubt over the 500 stained pieces of tiles, Seah Ling is entitled to 1,500 pieces X $5.00 (per piece) = $7,500.00. Deducting the $1,000.00 which was paid in advance, there is a balance of $6,500.00  to be paid to Seah Ling

As different people have different opinions, a different resultcan be reached in the following manner.

1. Seah Ling did deliver 2,000 pieces of marble tiles as agreed.
2. However, the surveyor's report has enough signs to indicate that the marble tiles are of a poor quality, which makes it easy for water to seep through the tiles after some time. This means that all of Bai Ying's tiles would be stained very soon; especially as his house is on the ground floor and there is a lot of water below the soil.
3. Bai Ying is justified in replacing all 2,000 pieces of marble tiles. Seah Ling did not deliver tiles which are suitable for the flooring of a house.
4. As a result, Bai Ying is entitled to a refund of the $1,000.00 deposit. In addition, Seah Ling has to pay for the expense of hacking the 2,000 pieces of Seah Ling's tiles in order to lay the new tiles.

The above examples show that it is impossible to apply amechanical process such as:

delivery of goods + acknowledgement and part payment by customer = seller/supplier must win the case.