AMALAN SETAR (M) SDN BHD CHARTER BUILT CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

AMALAN SETAR (M) SDN BHD CHARTER BUILT CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

The High Court found the Adjudicator had jurisdiction and validly exercised s25 powers; the matters raised by Amalan Setar were factual or merit-based and not proper grounds to set aside the Adjudication Decision under s15 CIPAA or to justify a stay under s16; accordingly enforcement of the Adjudication Decision was granted and the challenges dismissed.

Citation
WA-24C-141-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant (os136); Defendant (os141 & Os188): Charter Built Construction Sdn Bhd; Respondent (os136); Plaintiff (os141 & Os188): Amalan Setar (M) Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 February 2024
Case Number
WA-24C-141-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summonss Under CIPAA for Enforcement, Stay and Setting Aside of Adjudication Decision / Judgment (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
OS188 dismissed with costs; OS141 dismissed with costs; OS136 enforcement granted (Order in Terms for prayers 1-4) and Adjudication Decision enforced
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Stay Pending Arbitration, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision, Defect Liability Period, Extension of Time, Final Certificate Issuance, Liquidated Damages, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Statutory Adjudication Arbitration Contract Law Company Law Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Stay Pending Arbitration Setting Aside Adjudication Decision +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charter Built Construction Sdn Bhd

Applicant (os136); Defendant (os141 & Os188)

Amalan Setar (M) Sdn Bhd

Respondent (os136); Plaintiff (os141 & Os188)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summonss Under CIPAA for Enforcement, Stay and Setting Aside of Adjudication Decision / Judgment (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction and whether the adjudication was premature
  2. 2 Whether the Defects Liability Period was extended by 167 days and effect on claimant's entitlement
  3. 3 Validity of the 5th extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found the Adjudicator had jurisdiction and validly exercised s25 powers; the matters raised by Amalan Setar were factual or merit-based and not proper grounds to set aside the Adjudication Decision under s15 CIPAA or to justify a stay under s16; accordingly enforcement of the Adjudication Decision was granted and the challenges dismissed.

Court Disposition

OS188 dismissed with costs; OS141 dismissed with costs; OS136 enforcement granted (Order in Terms for prayers 1-4) and Adjudication Decision enforced

Orders

  • Dismiss OS188 (application to set aside AD) with costs
  • Dismiss OS141 (application to stay AD) with costs