KUNTUM MELOR SDN BHD PERBADANAN PERWIRA HARTA MALAYSIA

KUNTUM MELOR SDN BHD PERBADANAN PERWIRA HARTA MALAYSIA

The High Court set aside the Adjudication Decision because the Payment Claim failed on the face of it to comply with mandatory s5(2)(a) and (c) CIPAA (no identifiable calendar due date and insufficient description of the works), which rendered the Adjudicator to have acted in excess of jurisdiction; additionally the Adjudicator breached natural justice by excluding PPHM's defences and relying on estoppel and extra-contractual material without affording PPHM an opportunity to meet those matters; accordingly the AD was set aside, stay granted and enforcement dismissed.

Citation
WA-24C-107-06/2020 & WA-24C-149-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant/defendant: Perbadanan Perwira Harta Malaysia; Respondent/plaintiff: Kuntum Melor Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 September 2020
Case Number
WA-24C-107-06/2020 & WA-24C-149-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summonss Under CIPAA (setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications) / Final Judgment (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Setting Aside Application allowed; Stay Application allowed; Enforcement Application dismissed
Legal Topics
CIPAA Compliance, Payment Claim Requirements (s5(2)), Setting Aside Adjudication (s15), Stay of Adjudication Decision (s16), Enforcement of Adjudication (s28), Natural Justice, Jurisdictional Limits, Estoppel, Evidence Act Exclusion in Adjudication
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication and Dispute Resolution Contract Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure CIPAA Compliance Payment Claim Requirements (s5(2)) Setting Aside Adjudication (s15) +6 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Perbadanan Perwira Harta Malaysia

Applicant/defendant

Kuntum Melor Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Originating Summonss Under CIPAA (setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications) / Final Judgment (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether payment claim complied with s5(2) CIPAA (due date and description)
  2. 2 Whether Adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction by deciding on an invalid payment claim
  3. 3 Whether Adjudicator breached natural justice by excluding respondent's defences and relying on estoppel

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court set aside the Adjudication Decision because the Payment Claim failed on the face of it to comply with mandatory s5(2)(a) and (c) CIPAA (no identifiable calendar due date and insufficient description of the works), which rendered the Adjudicator to have acted in excess of jurisdiction; additionally the Adjudicator breached natural justice by excluding PPHM's defences and relying on estoppel and extra-contractual material without affording PPHM an opportunity to meet those matters; accordingly the AD was set aside, stay granted and enforcement dismissed.

Court Disposition

Setting Aside Application allowed; Stay Application allowed; Enforcement Application dismissed

Orders

  • Setting Aside Application (Originating Summons WA-24C-107-06/2020) allowed; Adjudication Decision dated 11.5.2020 set aside
  • Stay Application (Originating Summons WA-24C-108-06/2020) allowed; stay granted