IEC POWER ENGINEERING SDN BHD DANGA JED DEVELOPMENT MALAYSIA SDN BHD (dahulu dikenali sebagai Greenland Danga Bay Sdn Bhd)

IEC POWER ENGINEERING SDN BHD DANGA JED DEVELOPMENT MALAYSIA SDN BHD (dahulu dikenali sebagai Greenland Danga Bay Sdn Bhd)

Plaintiff's s.30 application was dismissed because plaintiff failed to discharge the initial legal burden of proving on the balance of probabilities that there was a sum 'due or payable' by the defendant to CTMCC at the time the s.30 notice was served, therefore s.30(5) CIPAA 2012 was not satisfied and the direct payment remedy could not be ordered.

Citation
JA-24C-3-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff / Subcontractor: IEC Power Engineering Sdn Bhd; Defendant / Principal: Danga Jed Development Malaysia Sdn Bhd (formerly Greenland Danga Bay Sdn Bhd); Main Contractor / Respondent in Adjudication: CTMCC Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 October 2025
Case Number
JA-24C-3-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Application Under CIPAA 2012 (section 30 Direct Payment) / High Court Judgment Dismissing Plaintiff's Originating Application (decision Dated 8 December 2025)
Outcome
Plaintiff's originating application for direct payment under s.30 CIPAA 2012 dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Payment Under Section 30 CIPAA, Threshold 'due or Payable' Requirement, Burden of Proof, Effect of Winding Up on Payment Obligations, Adjudication Enforcement
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Insolvency Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Statutory Adjudication (cipaa) Direct Payment Under Section 30 CIPAA Threshold 'due or Payable' Requirement Burden of Proof +2 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IEC Power Engineering Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff / Subcontractor

Danga Jed Development Malaysia Sdn Bhd (formerly Greenland Danga Bay Sdn Bhd)

Defendant / Principal

CTMCC Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd

Main Contractor / Respondent in Adjudication

Procedural Posture

Civil Application Under CIPAA 2012 (section 30 Direct Payment) / High Court Judgment Dismissing Plaintiff's Originating Application (decision Dated 8 December 2025)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff satisfied mandatory threshold in s.30(5) CIPAA that money was 'due or payable' by the principal to the main contractor when the s.30 notice was served
  2. 2 Legal effect of the main contractor's winding-up on the availability of s.30 CIPAA direct payment remedy and relative position of the subcontractor to other unsecured creditors
  3. 3 Allocation of burden of proof and effect of a bona fide dispute between principal and main contractor on a s.30 application

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff's s.30 application was dismissed because plaintiff failed to discharge the initial legal burden of proving on the balance of probabilities that there was a sum 'due or payable' by the defendant to CTMCC at the time the s.30 notice was served, therefore s.30(5) CIPAA 2012 was not satisfied and the direct payment remedy could not be ordered.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's originating application for direct payment under s.30 CIPAA 2012 dismissed

Orders

  • Application in Annexure 1 dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay costs to Defendant of RM5000.00