SMART GLOVE INDUSTRIES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD TECHNYGROUP HOLDINGS (M) SDN BHD

SMART GLOVE INDUSTRIES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD TECHNYGROUP HOLDINGS (M) SDN BHD

SGI failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the adjudication decision was procured by illegality, that the adjudicator acted beyond his jurisdiction or denied natural justice; the adjudicator lawfully considered contract payment terms and factual matters within his remit and properly discounted the independent expert report, therefore the setting aside and stay applications were dismissed and the enforcement application under s28 CIPAA was allowed because the Inai Kiara criteria were met.

Citation
WA-24C-52-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (o.s. No. WA 24 C 52 03/2023); Defendant (o.s. No. WA 24 C 83 05/2023): SMART GLOVE INDUSTRIES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD; Defendant (o.s. No. WA 24 C 52 03/2023); Plaintiff (o.s. No. WA 24 C 83 05/2023): TECHNYGROUP HOLDINGS (M) SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
31 January 2024
Case Number
WA-24C-52-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Applications Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) for Setting Aside an Adjudication Decision, Stay Pending Arbitration and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court (originating Summons Hearings); Grounds of Judgment Deciding Setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications
Outcome
Setting Aside Application dismissed; Enforcement Application allowed; Stay Application dismissed (withdrawn or earlier dismissed)
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Adjudication Decision (s15 Cipaa), Enforcement of Adjudication Decision as Judgment (s28 Cipaa), Statutory Stay Pending Arbitration (s16 Cipaa), Illegality of Works and Planning Permission (tcpa), Denial of Natural Justice and Adjudicator Jurisdiction (s27 Cipaa)
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Arbitration and Adjudication Contract Law Administrative/planning Law Civil Procedure Setting Aside Adjudication Decision (s15 Cipaa) Enforcement of Adjudication Decision as Judgment (s28 Cipaa) Statutory Stay Pending Arbitration (s16 Cipaa) +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SMART GLOVE INDUSTRIES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD

Plaintiff (o.s. No. WA 24 C 52 03/2023); Defendant (o.s. No. WA 24 C 83 05/2023)

TECHNYGROUP HOLDINGS (M) SDN BHD

Defendant (o.s. No. WA 24 C 52 03/2023); Plaintiff (o.s. No. WA 24 C 83 05/2023)

Procedural Posture

Applications Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) for Setting Aside an Adjudication Decision, Stay Pending Arbitration and Enforcement of Adjudication Decision / High Court (originating Summons Hearings); Grounds of Judgment Deciding Setting Aside, Stay and Enforcement Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudication decision should be set aside for illegality of works (planning permission not obtained)
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction by deciding matters not pleaded or relying on unpleaded materials
  3. 3 Whether there was denial of natural justice by the adjudicator in failing to consider or notify parties of matters relied upon

Ratio Decidendi

SGI failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the adjudication decision was procured by illegality, that the adjudicator acted beyond his jurisdiction or denied natural justice; the adjudicator lawfully considered contract payment terms and factual matters within his remit and properly discounted the independent expert report, therefore the setting aside and stay applications were dismissed and the enforcement application under s28 CIPAA was allowed because the Inai Kiara criteria were met.

Court Disposition

Setting Aside Application dismissed; Enforcement Application allowed; Stay Application dismissed (withdrawn or earlier dismissed)

Orders

  • Setting Aside Application (O.S. No. WA-24C-52-03/2023) dismissed with costs RM12000.00 subject to allocator
  • Enforcement Application (O.S. No. WA-24C-83-05/2023) allowed and adjudication decision enforced with costs RM3000.00 subject to allocator