BOND M&E SDN. BHD. GAME ON FUN PARK (SOUTHERN) SDN. BHD.

BOND M&E SDN. BHD. GAME ON FUN PARK (SOUTHERN) SDN. BHD.

The originating summons (Enclosure 1 in OS 3) was defective for non-compliance with mandatory Rules of Court requirements (intitulement and improper combination of stay and setting aside applications), GOF failed to establish a breach of natural justice or clear error by the adjudicator on the merits, the stay threshold under s.16 CIPAA was not met, and therefore the Court dismissed OS 3 and granted enforcement of the adjudication decision in OS 214 under s.28 CIPAA.

Citation
WA-24C-214-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (os 3); Defendant (os 214): GAME ON FUNPARK (SOUTHERN) SDN BHD; Defendant (os 3); Plaintiff (os 214): BOND M&E SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 July 2025
Case Number
WA-24C-214-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Enforcement and Challenge to Adjudication Decision Under CIPAA 2012 / High Court Judgment on Originating Summonses (os 3 and OS 214)
Outcome
OS 3 dismissed; enforcement of adjudication decision granted in OS 214; costs awarded to successful party.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision, Stay Application Under CIPAA, Natural Justice, Rules of Court Compliance
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Statutory Adjudication Adjudication Enforcement Setting Aside Adjudication Decision Stay Application Under CIPAA Natural Justice +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GAME ON FUNPARK (SOUTHERN) SDN BHD

Plaintiff (os 3); Defendant (os 214)

BOND M&E SDN BHD

Defendant (os 3); Plaintiff (os 214)

Procedural Posture

Enforcement and Challenge to Adjudication Decision Under CIPAA 2012 / High Court Judgment on Originating Summonses (os 3 and OS 214)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Enclosure 1 in OS 3 complied with mandatory requirements of Order 69A/Order 7 of the Rules of Court 2012
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator breached natural justice under section 15 CIPAA such that the adjudication decision should be set aside
  3. 3 Whether the court should grant a stay under section 16 CIPAA pending setting aside proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The originating summons (Enclosure 1 in OS 3) was defective for non-compliance with mandatory Rules of Court requirements (intitulement and improper combination of stay and setting aside applications), GOF failed to establish a breach of natural justice or clear error by the adjudicator on the merits, the stay threshold under s.16 CIPAA was not met, and therefore the Court dismissed OS 3 and granted enforcement of the adjudication decision in OS 214 under s.28 CIPAA.

Court Disposition

OS 3 dismissed; enforcement of adjudication decision granted in OS 214; costs awarded to successful party.

Orders

  • OS 3 dismissed with costs of RM10000.00 to Bond M&E Sdn Bhd
  • Order in terms granted for OS 214 to enforce the adjudication decision dated 21.11.2024; costs of RM5000.00 awarded (enclosure 1 in OS 214); adjudicated sums and interest enforceable as per adjudicator's decision