DELICATE BUILDERS SDN. BHD. INTIGA SDN. BHD.

DELICATE BUILDERS SDN. BHD. INTIGA SDN. BHD.

On re-hearing the court found Delicate primarily liable for delay due to inadequate manpower and failure to plead asserted excuses; Intiga entitled to back-charges arising from delay. The NYC claim was allowed only to the extent of East Elevation labour (reducing the judgment sum from RM172,719.62 to RM103,769.22). Scaffolding and overtime back-charges were held recoverable on balance of probabilities; Delicate’s counterclaim (RM360,691.17) dismissed for lack of documentary substantiation and pleaded particulars.

Citation
WA-12BC-11-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant (sessions Court): Delicate Builders Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent / Plaintiff (sessions Court): Intiga Sdn. Bhd.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 April 2025
Case Number
WA-12BC-11-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal (re Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part. Sessions Court judgment varied: amount recoverable by respondent against appellant reduced to RM103,769.22 with interest; appellant's counterclaim dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Delay and Liability, Back Charges, Extension of Time, Payment Claims, Counterclaim, Scaffolding Costs, Overtime Claims, Appellate Review Standards
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Statutory Adjudication (cipaa) Delay and Liability Back Charges Extension of Time Payment Claims +4 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Delicate Builders Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant / Defendant (sessions Court)

Intiga Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent / Plaintiff (sessions Court)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal (re Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay to completion was caused by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff entitled to back-charge RM131,440 for NYC appointment
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff entitled to back-charge RM204,526.98 for scaffolding

Ratio Decidendi

On re-hearing the court found Delicate primarily liable for delay due to inadequate manpower and failure to plead asserted excuses; Intiga entitled to back-charges arising from delay. The NYC claim was allowed only to the extent of East Elevation labour (reducing the judgment sum from RM172,719.62 to RM103,769.22). Scaffolding and overtime back-charges were held recoverable on balance of probabilities; Delicate’s counterclaim (RM360,691.17) dismissed for lack of documentary substantiation and pleaded particulars.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part. Sessions Court judgment varied: amount recoverable by respondent against appellant reduced to RM103,769.22 with interest; appellant's counterclaim dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Allow appeal in part and vary Sessions Court award: respondent awarded RM103,769.22 against appellant
  • Interest at 5% per annum on RM103,769.22 from date of filing of Writ of Summons until full settlement