MRCB SENTRAL PROPERTIES SDN BHD GSIB SDN BHD

MRCB SENTRAL PROPERTIES SDN BHD GSIB SDN BHD

The High Court dismissed the setting aside application because MRCB failed to establish that the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction or denied natural justice; the adjudicator had not decided the collateral‑contract claim on the merits, had given reasons, and his refusal to correct a post‑decision computational complaint did not constitute a material breach warranting setting aside. The Court granted enforcement of the relevant part of the adjudication decision under s28(2) CIPAA (balance of retention sum plus GST, interest and adjudication costs) and ordered costs as specified.

Citation
WA-24C-113-06/2020 & WA-24C-158-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff in O.s. No. WA 24 C 113 06/2020; Defendant in O.s. No. WA 24 C 158 07/2020: MRCB Sentral Properties Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant in O.s. No. WA 24 C 113 06/2020; Plaintiff in O.s. No. WA 24 C 158 07/2020: GSIB Sdn. Bhd.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 February 2021
Case Number
WA-24C-113-06/2020 & WA-24C-158-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Applications Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa): Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court Hearing and Grounds of Judgment (decision on Applications)
Outcome
Setting Aside Application dismissed; Enforcement Application (part) allowed; Stay Application struck out
Legal Topics
CIPAA Adjudication, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Natural Justice (audi Alteram Partem), Jurisdictional Limits, Computational/clerical Error, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Contract Law CIPAA Adjudication Setting Aside Adjudication Decision Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Natural Justice (audi Alteram Partem) +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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MRCB Sentral Properties Sdn. Bhd.

Plaintiff in O.s. No. WA 24 C 113 06/2020; Defendant in O.s. No. WA 24 C 158 07/2020

GSIB Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant in O.s. No. WA 24 C 113 06/2020; Plaintiff in O.s. No. WA 24 C 158 07/2020

Procedural Posture

Applications Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa): Setting Aside and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court Hearing and Grounds of Judgment (decision on Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction by deciding claims based on a collateral contract not pleaded in the Payment Claim
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator denied natural justice by failing to consider MRCB's submissions on the collateral contract and on amounts paid
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator was functus officio and refused to correct a computational/typographical error and whether that refusal warranted setting aside the decision

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the setting aside application because MRCB failed to establish that the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction or denied natural justice; the adjudicator had not decided the collateral‑contract claim on the merits, had given reasons, and his refusal to correct a post‑decision computational complaint did not constitute a material breach warranting setting aside. The Court granted enforcement of the relevant part of the adjudication decision under s28(2) CIPAA (balance of retention sum plus GST, interest and adjudication costs) and ordered costs as specified.

Court Disposition

Setting Aside Application dismissed; Enforcement Application (part) allowed; Stay Application struck out

Orders

  • Setting Aside Application in O.S. No. WA-24C-113-06/2020 dismissed with costs of RM5,000.00 (subject to allocator)
  • Enforcement Application in O.S. No. WA-24C-158-07/2020 granted in part: enforcement of the adjudicator's decision as to the balance retention sum of RM1,568,396.23 plus 6% GST, interest at 5% per annum from 11/6/2020 until full settlement, and adjudication costs of RM136,236.00 (as sought in prayers (b)(i),(b)(ii)...