Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Enforcement and setting aside of adjudication awards

Legal area

Court

8 Jan 2024

ANAS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD JKP SDN BHD

Citation

02(f)-4-01/2023(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

02(f)-4-01/2023(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The Federal Court held that strict civil pleading rules do not apply to CIPAA adjudication; a payment claim must identify the cause of action but need not particularise every subclause; an adjudicator may consider relevant contract provisions (including subclauses) and exercise inquisitorial powers under s25 so long as the dispute falls within the subject matter referred under ss5 and 6; reliance on clause 36.6 was not fatal, did not breach natural justice nor exceed jurisdiction, and the Court of Appeal's setting aside was reversed.
8 Jan 2024

ANAS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD JKP SDN BHD

Citation

02(f)-3-01/2023(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

02(f)-3-01/2023(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The Federal Court held that strict court-style pleadings do not apply to CIPAA adjudication; the payment claim and attached correspondence were sufficient to identify the cause of action (including reference to clause 36.6); an adjudicator is entitled to consider the whole contract and use inquisitorial powers under s25; a breach of natural justice will only set aside an award where the breach is material and likely to have affected the outcome. On the facts clause 36.6 was raised and in any event was not material to the award. The appeals are allowed and the Court of Appeal decision set asid…