MAISON ROUGE SDN BHD PINTARAS GEOTECHNICS SDN BHD

MAISON ROUGE SDN BHD PINTARAS GEOTECHNICS SDN BHD

The High Court dismissed the application to set aside the Award under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, holding the arbitrator properly evaluated evidence, law and causation, acted within his jurisdiction and did not breach natural justice; the Court allowed enforcement of the Award under section 38 and treated procedural defects under Order 69 r8(8) as non-prejudicial and non-fatal.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-30-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: Pintaras Geotechnics Sdn Bhd; Respondent/defendant: Maison Rouge Sdn Bhd
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 August 2024
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-30-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Arbitration – Setting Aside and Enforcement of Award / Judgment on Originating Summonses (setting Aside and Enforcement)
Outcome
OS 30 (application to set aside Award) dismissed with costs; Enclosure 38 and 45 OS 30 academic and dismissed with no order as to costs; OS 24 (application to enforce Award) allowed as prayed.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Arbitral Award Under S37, Enforcement of Arbitral Award Under S38, Extension of Time (eot), Damages and Causation, Admissibility and Weight of Evidence, Natural Justice and Public Policy, Jurisdictional Limits of Arbitrator
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Law Civil Procedure Construction Law Evidence Law Setting Aside Arbitral Award Under S37 Enforcement of Arbitral Award Under S38 Extension of Time (eot) Damages and Causation +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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pintaras Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Applicant/plaintiff

Maison Rouge Sdn Bhd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration – Setting Aside and Enforcement of Award / Judgment on Originating Summonses (setting Aside and Enforcement)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Award should be set aside under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005 on grounds of excess of jurisdiction, error of law or breach of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator erred by finding defective piles but dismissing or reducing rectification/delay damages claims
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator awarded an extension of time beyond what was pleaded and thereby deprived respondent of liquidated damages

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the application to set aside the Award under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, holding the arbitrator properly evaluated evidence, law and causation, acted within his jurisdiction and did not breach natural justice; the Court allowed enforcement of the Award under section 38 and treated procedural defects under Order 69 r8(8) as non-prejudicial and non-fatal.

Court Disposition

OS 30 (application to set aside Award) dismissed with costs; Enclosure 38 and 45 OS 30 academic and dismissed with no order as to costs; OS 24 (application to enforce Award) allowed as prayed.

Orders

  • Enclosure 1 of OS 30 dismissed with costs
  • Enclosure 38 OS 30 and Enclosure 45 OS 30 dismissed as academic with no order as to costs