SIME DARBY ENERGY SOLUTION SDN BHD (sebelum ini dikenali sebagai SIME DARBY OFFSHORE ENGINEERING SDN BHD) (No. Syarikat: 214416-V) RZH SETIA JAYA SDN BHD (NO. Syarikat: 539404-K)

SIME DARBY ENERGY SOLUTION SDN BHD (sebelum ini dikenali sebagai SIME DARBY OFFSHORE ENGINEERING SDN BHD) (No. Syarikat: 214416-V) RZH SETIA JAYA SDN BHD (NO. Syarikat: 539404-K)

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding the High Court erred in granting the Fortuna injunction because the respondent failed to establish a bona fide substantial dispute or timely commenced arbitration/proceedings to rebut the statutory presumption of insolvency; an adjudication decision can ground a winding up petition and the injunction was an inappropriate interference with the statutory and common law rights of the adjudication beneficiary to pursue winding up or enforcement.

Citation
B-02(NCC)(A)-695-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Sime Darby Energy Solution Sdn Bhd (formerly Sime Darby Offshore Engineering Sdn Bhd); Respondent/plaintiff: RZH Setia Jaya Sdn Bhd
Court
NCC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 February 2021
Case Number
B-02(NCC)(A)-695-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Determination on Appeal From High Court Injunction Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Fortuna Injunction, Winding Up Petition, Statutory Demand S.466 Companies Act 2016, CIPAA Adjudication and Enforcement (s.13, S.28 S.31), Bona Fide Dispute of Debt, Set Off and Liquidated and Ascertained Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Construction Law Arbitration Law Civil Procedure Injunctions Fortuna Injunction Winding Up Petition Statutory Demand S.466 Companies Act 2016 +3 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sime Darby Energy Solution Sdn Bhd (formerly Sime Darby Offshore Engineering Sdn Bhd)

Appellant/defendant

RZH Setia Jaya Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Determination on Appeal From High Court Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Fortuna injunction restraining presentation of a winding up petition based on a CIPAA adjudication decision was properly granted
  2. 2 Whether an adjudication decision can validly form the basis of a winding up petition and whether enforcement must be by CIPAA s.28 first
  3. 3 Whether the respondent had a bona fide substantial dispute to rebut the statutory presumption of insolvency under s.466(1)(a) Companies Act 2016

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding the High Court erred in granting the Fortuna injunction because the respondent failed to establish a bona fide substantial dispute or timely commenced arbitration/proceedings to rebut the statutory presumption of insolvency; an adjudication decision can ground a winding up petition and the injunction was an inappropriate interference with the statutory and common law rights of the adjudication beneficiary to pursue winding up or enforcement.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • High Court order dated 4.6.2020 granting injunction set aside
  • Costs of RM15000.00 to the Appellant here and below subject to payment of allocator