China Communications Construction Company (M) Sdn Bhd Jiangsu Zhongnan Construction Group (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd

China Communications Construction Company (M) Sdn Bhd Jiangsu Zhongnan Construction Group (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd

The court found the Adjudicator did not act in excess of jurisdiction and did not breach natural justice; the adjudicator considered the DPA, estoppel and relevant evidence and asked himself the right questions; no special circumstances were shown to warrant a stay pending setting aside and arbitration; accordingly the s16 stay application (OS 219) was dismissed with costs.

Citation
WA-24C-219-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: China Communications Construction (M) Sdn Bhd; Defendant/respondent: Jiangsu Zhongnan Construction Group (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 March 2024
Case Number
WA-24C-219-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons Under Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) S16 Stay Application / High Court Judgment on Stay Application (decision Stage)
Outcome
Originating Summons No. WA-24C-219-12/2021 (application for stay) dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Adjudication, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Natural Justice (bias/right to Be Heard), Enforcement Under CIPAA S28, Set Off, Performance Bond, Estoppel, CIPAA S15/s16/s25/s27/s28, Contracts Act S42
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Adjudication Arbitration Contract Law Insolvency/companies Law Civil Procedure Stay of Adjudication Jurisdiction of Adjudicator +7 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

China Communications Construction (M) Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff/applicant

Jiangsu Zhongnan Construction Group (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons Under Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (cipaa) S16 Stay Application / High Court Judgment on Stay Application (decision Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator acted in excess of jurisdiction under s27 CIPAA
  2. 2 Whether there was breach of natural justice in the adjudication process
  3. 3 Whether special circumstances exist to justify a stay of the Adjudication Decision under s16 CIPAA pending setting aside application and arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the Adjudicator did not act in excess of jurisdiction and did not breach natural justice; the adjudicator considered the DPA, estoppel and relevant evidence and asked himself the right questions; no special circumstances were shown to warrant a stay pending setting aside and arbitration; accordingly the s16 stay application (OS 219) was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Originating Summons No. WA-24C-219-12/2021 (application for stay) dismissed

Orders

  • Originating Summons No. WA-24C-219-12/2021 dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the Defendant/Respondent Jiangsu Zhongnan Construction Group (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd