ZETA LETRIK SDN BHD JAKS SDN BHD

ZETA LETRIK SDN BHD JAKS SDN BHD

The High Court dismissed the s15 setting aside application and the s16 stay application and allowed the s28 enforcement application. The court held JAKS failed to establish denial of natural justice or that the Adjudicator exceeded jurisdiction; alleged errors were factual or evaluative matters not amounting to jurisdictional nullity; no clear and unequivocal errors or special circumstances justified a stay; therefore the adjudication decision was enforceable as a High Court judgment.

Citation
WA-24C-153-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant (enforcement); Defendant (setting Aside & Stay): ZETA LETRIK SDN BHD; Respondent (enforcement); Plaintiff (setting Aside & Stay): JAKS SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 November 2021
Case Number
WA-24C-153-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons Under CIPAA (setting Aside S15; Stay S16; Enforcement S28) / High Court Judgment (grounds of Judgment Delivered 7 October 2022); Appeal Filed by JAKS Pending
Outcome
Setting Aside Application dismissed; Stay Application dismissed; Enforcement Application allowed; Adjudication Decision enforced as High Court judgment
Legal Topics
CIPAA S15 Setting Aside, CIPAA S16 Stay, CIPAA S28 Enforcement, Natural Justice (audi Alteram Partem), Jurisdictional Limits of Adjudicator, Interim Payment Certification, Enforcement as Judgment, Costs Orders
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Statutory Adjudication Arbitration Law Company Law Civil Procedure CIPAA S15 Setting Aside CIPAA S16 Stay CIPAA S28 Enforcement +5 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ZETA LETRIK SDN BHD

Applicant (enforcement); Defendant (setting Aside & Stay)

JAKS SDN BHD

Respondent (enforcement); Plaintiff (setting Aside & Stay)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons Under CIPAA (setting Aside S15; Stay S16; Enforcement S28) / High Court Judgment (grounds of Judgment Delivered 7 October 2022); Appeal Filed by JAKS Pending

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudication decision should be set aside under s15 CIPAA for denial of natural justice or excess of jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the High Court should stay enforcement of the adjudication decision under s16 CIPAA pending arbitration or determination of setting aside application
  3. 3 Whether the adjudication decision should be enforced as a High Court judgment under s28 CIPAA

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the s15 setting aside application and the s16 stay application and allowed the s28 enforcement application. The court held JAKS failed to establish denial of natural justice or that the Adjudicator exceeded jurisdiction; alleged errors were factual or evaluative matters not amounting to jurisdictional nullity; no clear and unequivocal errors or special circumstances justified a stay; therefore the adjudication decision was enforceable as a High Court judgment.

Court Disposition

Setting Aside Application dismissed; Stay Application dismissed; Enforcement Application allowed; Adjudication Decision enforced as High Court judgment

Orders

  • Setting Aside Application dismissed with costs of RM5,000.00 to Zeta (subject to allocatur)
  • Stay Application dismissed with costs of RM3,500.00 to Zeta (subject to allocatur)