SINOHYDRO CORPORATION (M) SDN BHD KAJ DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

SINOHYDRO CORPORATION (M) SDN BHD KAJ DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

The court granted the stay of execution pending disposal of the CIPAA appeals based on public interest and real risk of rendering the appeals nugatory, and allowed the appeal from the Deputy Registrar to set aside/discharge the ex-parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order because Sinohydro committed material non-disclosure in the ex-parte application and thus breached the duty of full and frank disclosure.

Citation
WA-36-31-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant/execution Creditor: Sinohydro Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd; Defendant/respondent/execution Debtor: KAJ Development Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 March 2023
Case Number
WA-36-31-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Under Cipaa; Interlocutory Applications for Stay of Execution and to Set Aside Ex Parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order / High Court Determination of Stay Application and Appeal From Deputy Registrar (interlocutory Remedies)
Outcome
Stay of execution granted; Appeal against Deputy Registrar allowed; Ex-parte Order (WSS and PO) discharged/set aside; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Ex Parte Applications and Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Under CIPAA S28, Writ of Seizure and Sale, Prohibitory Order, Equitable Charge, Public Interest in Interlocutory Relief
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Civil Procedure Land Law Company Law Arbitration Law Equity Stay of Execution Pending Appeal Ex Parte Applications and Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure +5 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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sinohydro Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff/applicant/execution Creditor

KAJ Development Sdn Bhd

Defendant/respondent/execution Debtor

Procedural Posture

Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Under Cipaa; Interlocutory Applications for Stay of Execution and to Set Aside Ex Parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order / High Court Determination of Stay Application and Appeal From Deputy Registrar (interlocutory Remedies)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances exist to grant stay of execution of enforcement order pending appeals
  2. 2 Whether ex-parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order should be set aside for material non-disclosure and abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether secured creditor must first realise security before executing against other assets

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the stay of execution pending disposal of the CIPAA appeals based on public interest and real risk of rendering the appeals nugatory, and allowed the appeal from the Deputy Registrar to set aside/discharge the ex-parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order because Sinohydro committed material non-disclosure in the ex-parte application and thus breached the duty of full and frank disclosure.

Court Disposition

Stay of execution granted; Appeal against Deputy Registrar allowed; Ex-parte Order (WSS and PO) discharged/set aside; costs awarded.

Orders

  • Stay of execution of Enforcement Order granted on 3 January 2023 with costs in the cause
  • Appeal against Deputy Registrar allowed on 10 March 2023; Ex‑Parte Order (Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order) set aside/discharged