MASTERPLAN CONSULTNG SDN BHD MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SDN BHD

MASTERPLAN CONSULTNG SDN BHD MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SDN BHD

The court held that (1) an arbitration clause does not oust CIPAA adjudication jurisdiction because adjudication may run concurrently with arbitration under s.37 CIPAA; (2) s.8(1) does not make supporting documents to a notice of adjudication mandatory such that their absence voids the notice; and (3) s.21 permits direct appointment by the adjudication institution without prior nomination by the claimant to the respondent; therefore the setting aside applications failed and enforcement applications succeeded.

Citation
WA-24C-150-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (setting Aside Originating Summons); Defendant (enforcement Originating Summons): Masterplan Consulting Sdn Bhd; Plaintiff (enforcement Originating Summons); Defendant (setting Aside Originating Summons): Motorola Solutions Malaysia Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 February 2020
Case Number
WA-24C-150-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) for Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decisions / Hearing and Grounds of Decision (judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Setting aside originating summonses dismissed; enforcement originating summonses allowed.
Legal Topics
CIPAA 2012, Adjudication, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Appointment of Adjudicator, Concurrent Dispute Resolution
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Arbitration Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law CIPAA 2012 Adjudication Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Setting Aside 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Masterplan Consulting Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff (setting Aside Originating Summons); Defendant (enforcement Originating Summons)

Motorola Solutions Malaysia Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff (enforcement Originating Summons); Defendant (setting Aside Originating Summons)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) for Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decisions / Hearing and Grounds of Decision (judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arbitration agreement ousts the jurisdiction of adjudication under CIPAA
  2. 2 Whether a notice of adjudication without supporting documents is fatally defective under s.8(1) CIPAA
  3. 3 Whether a claimant must nominate an adjudicator to the respondent before requesting AIAC appointment under ss.8(2) and 21 CIPAA

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that (1) an arbitration clause does not oust CIPAA adjudication jurisdiction because adjudication may run concurrently with arbitration under s.37 CIPAA; (2) s.8(1) does not make supporting documents to a notice of adjudication mandatory such that their absence voids the notice; and (3) s.21 permits direct appointment by the adjudication institution without prior nomination by the claimant to the respondent; therefore the setting aside applications failed and enforcement applications succeeded.

Court Disposition

Setting aside originating summonses dismissed; enforcement originating summonses allowed.

Orders

  • Dismissed Setting Aside Originating Summons nos. WA-24C-150-09/2019, WA-24C-152-09/2019, WA-24C-153-09/2019 and WA-24C-202-10/2019 with costs RM4,000.00 each subject to 4% allocator
  • Dismissed Setting Aside Originating Summons no. WA-24C-151-09/2019 with costs RM8,000.00 subject to 4% allocator