NAZRIN SHAHNAZ BINTI PEER MOHAMED SLOB SDN BHD

NAZRIN SHAHNAZ BINTI PEER MOHAMED SLOB SDN BHD

The defendant's application to set aside the Judgment in Default was dismissed because it was brought outside the 30‑day period under O.42 r.13 without any prior application for enlargement of time or cogent explanation for the delay, and because service of the originating summons and JID was properly effected at the defendant's registered addresses in accordance with the Rules of Court.

Citation
BA-24C-55-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (sub Contractor, Sole Proprietor): Nazrin Shahnaz binti Peer Mohamed; Defendant (principal / Company): Slob Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 July 2025
Case Number
BA-24C-55-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons to Enforce Adjudication Decision Under CIPAA 2012 (section 30) / Application to Set Aside Judgment in Default (dismissed)
Outcome
Application to set aside Judgment in Default dismissed.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Service of Process on Corporation, Setting Aside Judgment in Default, Extension of Time to Apply
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Statutory Adjudication Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Service of Process on Corporation Setting Aside Judgment in Default Extension of Time to Apply

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nazrin Shahnaz binti Peer Mohamed

Plaintiff (sub Contractor, Sole Proprietor)

Slob Sdn Bhd

Defendant (principal / Company)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons to Enforce Adjudication Decision Under CIPAA 2012 (section 30) / Application to Set Aside Judgment in Default (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's application to set aside the Judgment in Default (JID) was time‑barred under Order 42 r.13 of the Rules of Court 2012
  2. 2 Whether service of the Originating Summons and the JID on the defendant corporation was valid
  3. 3 Whether the court should enlarge time to permit an out‑of‑time application to set aside the JID

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's application to set aside the Judgment in Default was dismissed because it was brought outside the 30‑day period under O.42 r.13 without any prior application for enlargement of time or cogent explanation for the delay, and because service of the originating summons and JID was properly effected at the defendant's registered addresses in accordance with the Rules of Court.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside Judgment in Default dismissed.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs of RM5,000.00 to the Plaintiff subject to allocatur fee