PETRONAS Carigali (Turkmenistan) Sdn Bhd Ishengir Individual Enterprise

PETRONAS Carigali (Turkmenistan) Sdn Bhd Ishengir Individual Enterprise

The Court held that Order 6.3.2023 had the effect of the arbitration ceasing to exist and that section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953 applied; Enclosure 28 was filed promptly (2 days after the Order) and was a consequential/ancillary application to preserve limitation rights; objections by the plaintiff were rejected and the Court granted the exclusion order sought with costs to the defendant.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-62-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: PETRONAS Carigali (Turkmenistan) Sdn Bhd; Defendant/respondent: Ishengir Individual Enterprise
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 July 2023
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-62-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Appeal Under Arbitration Act 2005 / Post Judgment Application for Exclusion of Arbitration Period Under Section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953 (filed 8.3.2023)
Outcome
Application allowed; Order in terms granted.
Legal Topics
Section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953, Section 18(8) Arbitration Act 2005, Order 92 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012, Order 69 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012, Pre Arbitration Clause Compliance, Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal, Consequential Orders
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Limitation of Actions Civil Procedure Contract Law Section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953 Section 18(8) Arbitration Act 2005 Order 92 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012 Order 69 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012 +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PETRONAS Carigali (Turkmenistan) Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff/appellant

Ishengir Individual Enterprise

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Appeal Under Arbitration Act 2005 / Post Judgment Application for Exclusion of Arbitration Period Under Section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953 (filed 8.3.2023)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court can order exclusion of the arbitration period under s30(5) Limitation Act 1953
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is disentitled to relief under s30(5) by reason of conduct
  3. 3 Whether the application for exclusion is superfluous or academic

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Order 6.3.2023 had the effect of the arbitration ceasing to exist and that section 30(5) Limitation Act 1953 applied; Enclosure 28 was filed promptly (2 days after the Order) and was a consequential/ancillary application to preserve limitation rights; objections by the plaintiff were rejected and the Court granted the exclusion order sought with costs to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Order in terms granted.

Orders

  • Order granting prayer (a) of Enclosure 28 to exclude the period between commencement of the arbitration (23.9.2020) and the High Court Order (6.3.2023) in computing limitation
  • Costs awarded to the Defendant