Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Stay of adjudication decision (s16 cipaa)

Legal area

Court

31 Jul 2023

CLASSIC SERIES SDN BHD NG LUNG YANG

Citation

WA-24C-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed because Plaintiff failed to meet the threshold for para 16(1)(b) CIPAA (no arbitration or court proceedings pending), failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements in O.69A, elected not to participate in adjudication (thereby bearing consequences), and did not discharge burden to show clear error or that justice requires a stay; application was frivolous and costs awarded.
28 Jul 2023

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD MALAYSIAN RESOURCES CORPORATION BERHAD

Citation

WA-24C-166-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-166-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that s37(1) CIPAA is permissive and must be construed purposively; adjudication may be initiated even after arbitration or court proceedings commence and does not ipso facto oust adjudicator jurisdiction. The payment claim met s5(2) CIPAA requirements; there was no jurisdictional excess nor breach of natural justice warranting setting aside. No clear and unequivocal errors or injustice justified a stay. Consequently the setting aside and stay applications were dismissed and the adjudication decision was enforced as a High Court judgment.
23 Mar 2021

MKP BUILDERS SDN. BHD. PC GEOTECHNIC SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-24C-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24C-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

PCG's preliminary objection was dismissed for non-compliance with Bar Council Ruling 11.04 but the originating summons by MKP seeking a stay of enforcement was dismissed: once the High Court has granted enforcement under s28 CIPAA it will not ordinarily grant a stay under s16(1)(b) thereafter; in any event MKP was barred by issue estoppel for failing to raise the stay earlier and by equitable estoppel given its prior conduct and affidavits; MKP failed to discharge the onus to show grounds under View Esteem (no clear and unequivocal error and no real risk of PCG insolvency); MKP also failed to…
11 Sept 2019

KURNIAAN MAJU SDN. BHD. (Co. No.: 281633-D) HSA SETIAMURNI SDN. BHD. (Co. No.: 574981-V)

Citation

BA-24C-79-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24C-79-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court allowed that a hybrid originating summons is permissible, dismissed the s16(1)(b) CIPAA stay application because the plaintiff failed to show clear error by the adjudicator or that staying the adjudication was justified given prejudice to the defendant and lack of evidence of plaintiff insolvency, held the adjudication decision rendered the defendant a creditor under s464(1)(b) CA entitled to present a winding up petition, and although the court has power to grant a Fortuna injunction it refused to do so because the defendant was exercising bona fide statutory rights and there was n…

Malaysia Case Law

CLASSIC SERIES SDN BHD NG LUNG YANG

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD MALAYSIAN RESOURCES CORPORATION BERHAD

MKP BUILDERS SDN. BHD. PC GEOTECHNIC SDN. BHD.

KURNIAAN MAJU SDN. BHD. (Co. No.: 281633-D) HSA SETIAMURNI SDN. BHD. (Co. No.: 574981-V)