HOCK SENG TRADING & CONSTRUCTION HONGLER ENTERPRISE SDN BHD

HOCK SENG TRADING & CONSTRUCTION HONGLER ENTERPRISE SDN BHD

Because Hongler sued the business name alone rather than the sole proprietor in his personal name trading as the business, the correct party was not before the adjudicator; that defect deprived the adjudicator of jurisdiction and rendered the adjudication proceedings and the adjudication decision void ab initio; accordingly there was no valid AD to enforce and the High Court's dismissals were affirmed.

Citation
W-02(C)(A)-980-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff / Respondent (various Proceedings): Hock Seng Trading & Construction (sole proprietorship of Chai Hon Sang); Respondent / Appellant (various Proceedings): Hongler Enterprise Sdn Bhd
Court
C
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 June 2025
Case Number
W-02(C)(A)-980-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals From High Court Relating to CIPAA Adjudication / Judgment at Court of Appeal (appeals Heard Together; Judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; decisions of the High Court in OS No. WA-24C-144-09/2023 and OS No. WA-24C-130-08/2023 affirmed
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Adjudication Decision, Intitulement, Void Ab Initio, Amendment of Proceedings
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication Under CIPAA Civil Procedure Business Entity Law (sole Proprietorship) Locus Standi Jurisdiction Enforcement of Adjudication Decision Intitulement +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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hock Seng Trading & Construction (sole proprietorship of Chai Hon Sang)

Appellant / Plaintiff / Respondent (various Proceedings)

Hongler Enterprise Sdn Bhd

Respondent / Appellant (various Proceedings)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals From High Court Relating to CIPAA Adjudication / Judgment at Court of Appeal (appeals Heard Together; Judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to name the sole proprietor (by personal name trading as business) at adjudication vitiates jurisdiction and renders the adjudication void ab initio
  2. 2 Whether an adjudication decision obtained against a wrongly named entity can be enforced under s 28 CIPAA
  3. 3 Whether defects in intitulement could have been cured by amendment or by participation of parties

Ratio Decidendi

Because Hongler sued the business name alone rather than the sole proprietor in his personal name trading as the business, the correct party was not before the adjudicator; that defect deprived the adjudicator of jurisdiction and rendered the adjudication proceedings and the adjudication decision void ab initio; accordingly there was no valid AD to enforce and the High Court's dismissals were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; decisions of the High Court in OS No. WA-24C-144-09/2023 and OS No. WA-24C-130-08/2023 affirmed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Decisions of the High Court in OS No. WA-24C-144-09/2023 and OS No. WA-24C-130-08/2023 are affirmed