1. ) PUNG TIONG GEE 2. ) PUNG TIONG CHENG FORTUNE FACADE TREATMENT SDN BHD

1. ) PUNG TIONG GEE 2. ) PUNG TIONG CHENG FORTUNE FACADE TREATMENT SDN BHD

The court set aside the adjudication decision because the adjudicator improperly imposed a direction effectively barring the respondent from fully participating for non-payment of the ASD contrary to CIPAA and the AIAC rules, thereby breaching natural justice; the adjudicator also failed to address the applicant's request to refile or supplement its response and to consider the res judicata defence, creating a real possibility of a different outcome if properly considered.

Citation
WA-24C-181-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (os158 & Os159); Defendant (os181): Fortune Façade Treatment Sdn Bhd; Defendant (os158 & Os159); Plaintiff (os181): Pung Tiong Gee; Defendant (os158 & Os159); Plaintiff (os181): Pung Tiong Cheng
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 May 2025
Case Number
WA-24C-181-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
CIPAA Adjudication Setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications / High Court Judgment (construction Division) on Originating Summonses
Outcome
Grant of OS159 (orders 1 and 2 of enclosure 1); dismissal of OS158; dismissal of OS181 with costs
Legal Topics
CIPAA, Set Aside Adjudication Decision, Stay of Adjudication, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Natural Justice, Res Judicata, Advance Security Deposit (asd)
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication Civil Procedure Contract Law CIPAA Set Aside Adjudication Decision Stay of Adjudication Enforcement of Adjudication Decision +3 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fortune Façade Treatment Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff (os158 & Os159); Defendant (os181)

Pung Tiong Gee

Defendant (os158 & Os159); Plaintiff (os181)

Pung Tiong Cheng

Defendant (os158 & Os159); Plaintiff (os181)

Procedural Posture

CIPAA Adjudication Setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications / High Court Judgment (construction Division) on Originating Summonses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudication decision dated 19.8.2024 should be set aside for breach of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction by barring respondent from filing a full adjudication response due to non-payment of ASD
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Legal Claim was barred by res judicata due to earlier settlement (1st Legal Claim)

Ratio Decidendi

The court set aside the adjudication decision because the adjudicator improperly imposed a direction effectively barring the respondent from fully participating for non-payment of the ASD contrary to CIPAA and the AIAC rules, thereby breaching natural justice; the adjudicator also failed to address the applicant's request to refile or supplement its response and to consider the res judicata defence, creating a real possibility of a different outcome if properly considered.

Court Disposition

Grant of OS159 (orders 1 and 2 of enclosure 1); dismissal of OS158; dismissal of OS181 with costs

Orders

  • Grant prayers 1 and 2 of enclosure 1 in Originating Summons No. WA-24C-159-10/2024 (OS159)
  • Dismiss Originating Summons No. WA-24C-158-10/2024 (OS158)