POLY RITZ VENTURES SDN BHD VESTLAND RESOURCES SDN BHD

POLY RITZ VENTURES SDN BHD VESTLAND RESOURCES SDN BHD

The Work Order constituted a construction contract in writing under s.2 CIPAA; the adjudicator acted within jurisdiction and accorded procedural fairness (no denial of natural justice); there was no double award or double charging; accordingly the application to set aside was dismissed and the adjudication decision was enforceable and allowed to be enforced.

Citation
wa-24c-36-02/2020 & 24c-40-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff in OS 1; Defendant in OS 2: POLY RITZ VENTURES SDN BHD; Defendant in OS 1; Plaintiff in OS 2: VESTLAND RESOURCES SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 September 2020
Case Number
wa-24c-36-02/2020 & 24c-40-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons Under CIPAA 2012 / High Court Decision on Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication; Appeal Lodged to Court of Appeal
Outcome
OS 1 dismissed; OS 2 allowed; enforcement of adjudication decision ordered
Legal Topics
CIPAA 2012 Application, Construction Contract in Writing, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Natural Justice, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication Law Contract Law Civil Procedure CIPAA 2012 Application Construction Contract in Writing Jurisdiction of Adjudicator 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

POLY RITZ VENTURES SDN BHD

Plaintiff in OS 1; Defendant in OS 2

VESTLAND RESOURCES SDN BHD

Defendant in OS 1; Plaintiff in OS 2

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons Under CIPAA 2012 / High Court Decision on Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication; Appeal Lodged to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Work Order constituted a construction contract in writing under s.2 CIPAA
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether there was denial of natural justice arising from alleged double charging

Ratio Decidendi

The Work Order constituted a construction contract in writing under s.2 CIPAA; the adjudicator acted within jurisdiction and accorded procedural fairness (no denial of natural justice); there was no double award or double charging; accordingly the application to set aside was dismissed and the adjudication decision was enforceable and allowed to be enforced.

Court Disposition

OS 1 dismissed; OS 2 allowed; enforcement of adjudication decision ordered

Orders

  • OS 1 dismissed with costs of RM7,500.00 subject to 4% allocator
  • OS 2 allowed; adjudication decision enforced; costs RM7,500.00 subject to 4% allocator