AGV OFFSHORE SDN BHD BETTER POWER (M) SDN BHD

AGV OFFSHORE SDN BHD BETTER POWER (M) SDN BHD

Better Power failed to establish any jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice under s.15 CIPAA: the misnaming was a non-fatal misdescription where parties' identities were clear; the adjudicator acted within remit in evaluating evidence and adopting a methodology to assess quantum (an error in valuation is a merits issue, not jurisdictional); the adjudicator provided adequate reasons per s.12(4); there was no denial of procedural fairness in refusing a rejoinder; consequently the AD stood and was enforceable under s.28 CIPAA as the statutory conditions were satisfied.

Citation
BA-24C-59-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant (os54); Respondent (os59): Better Power (M) Sdn Bhd; Respondent (os54); Applicant (os59): AGV Offshore Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 January 2026
Case Number
BA-24C-59-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
CIPAA Adjudication: Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court Judgment on Originating Summonses (os 54 and OS 59)
Outcome
OS 54 dismissed; OS 59 allowed; adjudication decision enforced as High Court order
Legal Topics
Adjudication Under CIPAA, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision S.15, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision S.28, Natural Justice, Jurisdiction, Payment Disputes
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Contract Law Adjudication Under CIPAA Setting Aside Adjudication Decision S.15 Enforcement of Adjudication Decision S.28 Natural Justice +2 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Better Power (M) Sdn Bhd

Applicant (os54); Respondent (os59)

AGV Offshore Sdn Bhd

Respondent (os54); Applicant (os59)

Procedural Posture

CIPAA Adjudication: Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court Judgment on Originating Summonses (os 54 and OS 59)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adjudication decision could be set aside for denial of natural justice under s.15(b) CIPAA
  2. 2 Whether adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction under s.15(d) CIPAA by adopting his own methodology to assess completion
  3. 3 Whether misnaming of the respondent (Better Power Sdn Bhd vs Better Power (M) Sdn Bhd) voids the adjudication

Ratio Decidendi

Better Power failed to establish any jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice under s.15 CIPAA: the misnaming was a non-fatal misdescription where parties' identities were clear; the adjudicator acted within remit in evaluating evidence and adopting a methodology to assess quantum (an error in valuation is a merits issue, not jurisdictional); the adjudicator provided adequate reasons per s.12(4); there was no denial of procedural fairness in refusing a rejoinder; consequently the AD stood and was enforceable under s.28 CIPAA as the statutory conditions were satisfied.

Court Disposition

OS 54 dismissed; OS 59 allowed; adjudication decision enforced as High Court order

Orders

  • OS 54 dismissed with costs of RM5,000 to be paid by Better Power (M) Sdn Bhd to AGV Offshore Sdn Bhd
  • OS 59 allowed; Order that the Adjudication Decision dated 29.08.2025 (adjudicated sum RM218,848.50 with interest and adjudicator/AIAC/solicitor costs) be enforced as if a judgment of the High Court; costs of RM3,000 to be paid by Better Power (M) Sdn Bhd to AGV Offshore Sdn Bhd