18 Oct 2024
WA-24C(ARB)-58-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
8 Jul 2021
Court held there was a valid arbitration agreement despite tiered dispute resolution and possessed jurisdiction under s.11 AA to grant interim measures before arbitration commenced; plaintiff raised a serious question; damages were likely inadequate because immediate deduction of RM191,624,300.74 would jeopardize plaintiff's operations while TNB would suffer minimal prejudice; balance of convenience favoured granting a limited interlocutory injunction to maintain the status quo pending arbitration, subject to conditions (proceed to arbitration with due despatch).
5 Mar 2021
The High Court, empowered by s.11 Arbitration Act 2005, granted the interim Mareva injunction and mandatory disclosure because the plaintiff demonstrated a good and arguable claim, the defendant admitted receipt of substantial funds and has assets within jurisdiction (CIMB account), there is prima facie evidence of lack of probity and a real risk of dissipation given the defendant's conduct and similar dealings with other parties, and the balance of convenience favoured preservation of assets pending arbitration.