TSS BBW

TSS BBW

The court exercised its discretion under s37(7) Arbitration Act 2005, found no proven prejudice to the defendant nor any evidence the plaintiff would dissipate assets, and found the plaintiff solvent on the evidence; accordingly the court refused to order security for the award and dismissed the application (Enclosure 12) with costs.

Citation
WA-24C(ARB)-58-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: TSS; Defendant: BBW
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 July 2024
Case Number
WA-24C(ARB)-58-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons Arbitration Award Security/enforcement / Interlocutory Application Determined (enclosure 12 Dismissed); Appeal Filed by Defendant
Outcome
Enclosure 12 dismissed with costs; no order made for deposit or security of award monies
Legal Topics
Security for Award, Setting Aside Arbitral Award, Enforcement of Award, Stay of Enforcement, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Civil Procedure Contract Security for Award Setting Aside Arbitral Award Enforcement of Award Stay of Enforcement Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSS

Plaintiff

BBW

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons Arbitration Award Security/enforcement / Interlocutory Application Determined (enclosure 12 Dismissed); Appeal Filed by Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should order the monies under the arbitral award be deposited/secured pursuant to section 37(7) Arbitration Act 2005 pending the plaintiff's setting aside application
  2. 2 Whether the defendant demonstrated prejudice or risk of dissipation sufficient to justify security
  3. 3 Whether an arbitral award being final and binding creates an automatic right to court-ordered security

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion under s37(7) Arbitration Act 2005, found no proven prejudice to the defendant nor any evidence the plaintiff would dissipate assets, and found the plaintiff solvent on the evidence; accordingly the court refused to order security for the award and dismissed the application (Enclosure 12) with costs.

Court Disposition

Enclosure 12 dismissed with costs; no order made for deposit or security of award monies

Orders

  • Enclosure 12 dismissed with costs