MRCB BUILDERS SDN BHD A.F.S. Engineering Sdn. Bhd.

MRCB BUILDERS SDN BHD A.F.S. Engineering Sdn. Bhd.

Court found no breach of natural justice or public policy: alleged communications were administrative (fee collection) and not substantive ex parte communications; secretary acted within administrative role; arbitrator provided adequate reasoning on key issues (back charges, interest, performance bond, defects, retention sums); Plaintiff's complaints amounted to merits challenge not grounds under s37. Therefore application to set aside award dismissed and stay application rendered academic and dismissed with costs.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-74-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: MRCB Builders Sdn Bhd; Defendant: AFS Engineering Sdn Bhd
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 September 2025
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-74-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Stay Enforcement / High Court Judgment on Setting Aside Application and Stay Application
Outcome
Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed; stay application dismissed as academic; costs awarded to respondent
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Award, Natural Justice, Ex Parte Communication, Arbitrator Impartiality, Secretary Role in Arbitration, Performance Bond, Interest Calculation, Stay of Enforcement
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Civil Procedure Contract Construction Law Public Policy Setting Aside Award Natural Justice Ex Parte Communication +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MRCB Builders Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

AFS Engineering Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Stay Enforcement / High Court Judgment on Setting Aside Application and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ex parte communications between arbitrator and respondent vitiated award
  2. 2 Whether arbitrator's secretary acted beyond administrative scope
  3. 3 Whether arbitrator committed substantive errors amounting to breach of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

Court found no breach of natural justice or public policy: alleged communications were administrative (fee collection) and not substantive ex parte communications; secretary acted within administrative role; arbitrator provided adequate reasoning on key issues (back charges, interest, performance bond, defects, retention sums); Plaintiff's complaints amounted to merits challenge not grounds under s37. Therefore application to set aside award dismissed and stay application rendered academic and dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed; stay application dismissed as academic; costs awarded to respondent

Orders

  • Enclosure 1 (setting aside application) dismissed with costs
  • Enclosure 2 (stay application) dismissed as academic with costs