1. ) SAMADO SDN BHD 2. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) SAMADO SDN BHD

1. ) SAMADO SDN BHD 2. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) SAMADO SDN BHD

The High Court found the Government failed to establish a denial of natural justice or that the adjudicator acted beyond jurisdiction; the adjudicator had given parties opportunity to be heard, considered the evidence, lawfully revised the practical completion date under s25(m) within the scope of the payment claim, and lawfully exercised discretion on costs; therefore the adjudication decision stands and is enforceable as a High Court judgment.

Citation
WA-24C-99-06/2019 & WA-24C-121-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (os WA 24 C 99 06/2019); Defendant (os WA 24 C 121 07/2019): Samado Sdn Bhd (Company No.: 117555-V); Defendant (os WA 24 C 99 06/2019); Plaintiff (os WA 24 C 121 07/2019): Kerajaan Malaysia (Government of Malaysia)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 October 2019
Case Number
WA-24C-99-06/2019 & WA-24C-121-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
CIPAA Enforcement and Setting Aside Applications / High Court Grounds of Judgment; Appeal by Government of Malaysia Filed
Outcome
Enforcement application by Samado allowed; Government of Malaysia's application to set aside dismissed; adjudication decision enforced as High Court judgment.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Setting Aside Adjudication Decision, Natural Justice, Excess of Jurisdiction, Liquidated and Ascertained Damages, Practical Completion, Costs of Adjudication
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication Contract Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Setting Aside Adjudication Decision Natural Justice +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samado Sdn Bhd (Company No.: 117555-V)

Plaintiff (os WA 24 C 99 06/2019); Defendant (os WA 24 C 121 07/2019)

Kerajaan Malaysia (Government of Malaysia)

Defendant (os WA 24 C 99 06/2019); Plaintiff (os WA 24 C 121 07/2019)

Procedural Posture

CIPAA Enforcement and Setting Aside Applications / High Court Grounds of Judgment; Appeal by Government of Malaysia Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a denial of natural justice under section 15(b) CIPAA
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction under section 15(d) CIPAA
  3. 3 Whether the works had reached practical completion and the correct date for CPC

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found the Government failed to establish a denial of natural justice or that the adjudicator acted beyond jurisdiction; the adjudicator had given parties opportunity to be heard, considered the evidence, lawfully revised the practical completion date under s25(m) within the scope of the payment claim, and lawfully exercised discretion on costs; therefore the adjudication decision stands and is enforceable as a High Court judgment.

Court Disposition

Enforcement application by Samado allowed; Government of Malaysia's application to set aside dismissed; adjudication decision enforced as High Court judgment.

Orders

  • Enforce Adjudication Decision dated 12.3.2019 as judgment: Government of Malaysia to pay Adjudicated Sum RM605,766.82 with simple interest at 4% per annum from 29 May 2015 until payment.
  • OS No. WA-24C-99-06/2019 (SSB enforcement) allowed; costs awarded to SSB RM3,000.00 (subject to allocator).