Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Setting aside award

Legal area

Court

29 Sept 2025

KASYAF BINA SDN BHD LEMBAGA KEMAJUAN TANAH PERSEKUTUAN (FELDA)

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-64-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-64-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Plaintiff failed to prove any breach of natural justice, excess of jurisdiction or conflict with public policy under Section 37; the complaints were disagreements with the Arbitrator's factual findings and contractual interpretation which are not reviewable by the High Court; the Setting Aside Application is dismissed and the Award is upheld.
2 Sept 2025

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

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-74-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-74-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

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.
9 Nov 2023

NUEMERA (M) SDN BHD SURUHANJAYA KOMUNIKASI DAN MULTIMEDIA MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-24NCC(ARB)-7-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24NCC(ARB)-7-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Addendum Award was a permissible correction under section 35(1)(a) AA 2005 and Article 38 AIAC Rules because the tribunal inadvertently used the wrong commencement date for interest (an inadvertent computational/omission error that did not alter the substance of the award), therefore the Addendum Award was valid and the originating summons to set it aside was dismissed.
13 Oct 2023

JIANGSU PROVINCIAL CONSTRUCTION (M) SDN BHD D BOX SYSTEM (M) SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-18-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-18-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Leave to file the setting aside application out of time was refused because the Arbitrator's record showed Jiangsu's counsel collected the Award on 10.11.2022 and Jiangsu offered no compelling evidence or justification for the delay; on the merits, Jiangsu failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that a breach of natural justice occurred in connection with the Award that would engage public policy under s37 AA 2005; accordingly the setting aside application was dismissed and the enforcement application was allowed.
14 Feb 2022

1. ) AB RAHMAN RAJANDRAN BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) NOOR AZIZAH BINTI ABD AZIZ ALIAS BIN MOKHTAR

Citation

JB-24NCvC-214-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-24NCvC-214-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to prove any ground under section 37 to set aside the arbitration award: the defendant was the registered proprietor at the time of the 2017 arbitration (defeating the plaintiffs' locus standi claim), the alleged post‑2017 transfer was irrelevant to the award, and the plaintiffs did not prove irregularity, incapacity, invalid arbitration agreement or that the award dealt with matters beyond the submission. Consequently the originating summons to set aside the award was dismissed and the award upheld.
11 Feb 2022

HINDUSTAN OIL EXPLORATION COMPANY LIMITED HARDY EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION (INDIA) INC

Citation

WA-24NCC(ARB)-25-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24NCC(ARB)-25-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The originating summons was dismissed because the challenged matters were within the scope of the tribunal's mandate and submitted issues; the tribunal lawfully determined the seat to be Kuala Lumpur making limitation a procedural lex arbitri matter governed by Malaysian law; errors in contractual interpretation or application of law are not independent grounds to set aside under s.37 AA2005; the plaintiff waived or is estopped from belatedly raising objections it did not raise before the tribunal; the high threshold for public policy and breach of natural justice was not met and the court wi…
8 Oct 2020

Ken Grouting Sdn. Bhd. RKT Nusantara Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

W-02(C)(A)-1560-07/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

C
Case number

W-02(C)(A)-1560-07/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The PAM Rules' deadline for delivering an award (Article 21.3) is mandatory and jurisdictional; because the arbitrator did not extend time by notification or apply to the court under s.46 AA 2005, his mandate and jurisdiction ceased when the deadline passed, so the award delivered thereafter was without authority and properly set aside under s.37(1)(a)(vi) AA 2005; party silence after the deadline does not constitute waiver of that cessation and s.18(5) does not bar a s.37(1)(a)(vi) challenge in these circumstances unless time is validly extended.

Malaysia Case Law

KASYAF BINA SDN BHD LEMBAGA KEMAJUAN TANAH PERSEKUTUAN (FELDA)

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

NUEMERA (M) SDN BHD SURUHANJAYA KOMUNIKASI DAN MULTIMEDIA MALAYSIA

JIANGSU PROVINCIAL CONSTRUCTION (M) SDN BHD D BOX SYSTEM (M) SDN BHD

1. ) AB RAHMAN RAJANDRAN BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) NOOR AZIZAH BINTI ABD AZIZ ALIAS BIN MOKHTAR

HINDUSTAN OIL EXPLORATION COMPANY LIMITED HARDY EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION (INDIA) INC

Ken Grouting Sdn. Bhd. RKT Nusantara Sdn. Bhd.