TRANSGRID VENTURES SDN BHD COLAS RAIL SYSTEM ENGINEERING SDN BHD

TRANSGRID VENTURES SDN BHD COLAS RAIL SYSTEM ENGINEERING SDN BHD

The High Court has no jurisdiction to hear Transgrid's s 42 application because s 42 AA 2005 was repealed before the Award was published and the Court accepts that the right to invoke s 42 crystallises upon making/publication of an award; on the merits the Court found the arbitrator did not exceed jurisdiction (the illegality issue was within pleadings and evidence) and there was no breach of natural justice, therefore the setting aside application was dismissed and the enforcement application was allowed; costs awarded to CRSE.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-54-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (originating Summons Nos. WA 24 C(arb) 54 12/2019 & WA 24 C(arb) 5 01/2020); Defendant (wa 24 C(arb) 7 01/2020): Transgrid Ventures Sdn Bhd; Defendant (originating Summons Nos. WA 24 C(arb) 54 12/2019 & WA 24 C(arb) 5 01/2020); Plaintiff (wa 24 C(arb) 7 01/2020): Colas Rail System Engineering Sdn Bhd (now known as CRSE Sdn Bhd)
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 October 2020
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-54-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (challenges to and Enforcement of Arbitral Award) / Judgment Delivered (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
s 42 Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction; Setting Aside Application (s 37) dismissed; Enforcement Application (s 38) allowed and Award recognised as judgment.
Legal Topics
Reference on Question of Law (former S 42 AA 2005), Setting Aside Arbitral Award (s 37 AA 2005), Enforcement of Arbitral Award (s 38 AA 2005), Jurisdiction, Natural Justice, Illegality/ Public Policy, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Contract Civil Procedure Public Policy Criminal Allegations Reference on Question of Law (former S 42 AA 2005) Setting Aside Arbitral Award (s 37 AA 2005) Enforcement of Arbitral Award (s 38 AA 2005) +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Transgrid Ventures Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff (originating Summons Nos. WA 24 C(arb) 54 12/2019 & WA 24 C(arb) 5 01/2020); Defendant (wa 24 C(arb) 7 01/2020)

Colas Rail System Engineering Sdn Bhd (now known as CRSE Sdn Bhd)

Defendant (originating Summons Nos. WA 24 C(arb) 54 12/2019 & WA 24 C(arb) 5 01/2020); Plaintiff (wa 24 C(arb) 7 01/2020)

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (challenges to and Enforcement of Arbitral Award) / Judgment Delivered (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear an application under s 42 AA 2005 after repeal
  2. 2 Whether the right under s 42 vested at commencement of arbitration or on making of award
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by deciding matters beyond the submission to arbitration (s 37(1)(a)(iv) & (v))

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has no jurisdiction to hear Transgrid's s 42 application because s 42 AA 2005 was repealed before the Award was published and the Court accepts that the right to invoke s 42 crystallises upon making/publication of an award; on the merits the Court found the arbitrator did not exceed jurisdiction (the illegality issue was within pleadings and evidence) and there was no breach of natural justice, therefore the setting aside application was dismissed and the enforcement application was allowed; costs awarded to CRSE.

Court Disposition

s 42 Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction; Setting Aside Application (s 37) dismissed; Enforcement Application (s 38) allowed and Award recognised as judgment.

Orders

  • O.S. No. WA-24C(ARB)-54-12/2019 (s 42 application) dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
  • O.S. No. WA-24C(ARB)-5-01/2020 (setting aside application) dismissed