Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Enforcement of arbitration award

Legal area

Court

8 Apr 2025

SPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD 1. ) WIRADANI DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 2. ) AKITEK AKIPRIMA SDN BHD 3. ) DATO SRI UNG ENG HUAT 4. ) DATO CHEAH KAH LIP 5. ) DATUK LEONG YENG KIT 6. ) Ahmad Azizi Bin Haji Ali

Citation

BA-22NCvC-399-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-399-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court struck out the writ and statement of claim because the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata and constituted an abuse of process, the pleadings failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action for fraud or conspiracy due to lack of requisite particularity and absence of the relied-on forensic report, and allowing the suit would undermine finality of the arbitration award and consent judgment.
29 Feb 2024

CREST BUILDER SDN BHD SAUJANA TRIANGLE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-25-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-25-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the Shah Alam Fortuna injunction was interlocutory and did not produce a final determination giving rise to res judicata or issue estoppel binding the arbitral tribunal; the arbitrator acted within jurisdiction in refusing late amendments and recall after considering delay and prejudice and articulating reasons; Saujana failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Award conflicted with Malaysian public policy or that there was a breach of natural justice; enforcement under s 38 AA 2005 was therefore allowed and the application to set aside was dismissed.
28 Feb 2024

RZH SETIA JAYA SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION) SIME DARBY ENERGY SOLUTIONS SDN BHD

Citation

BA-24C(ARB)-8-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

BA-24C(ARB)-8-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

SDES failed to establish that the Award conflicted with Malaysia's public policy or that there was a breach of natural justice that materially affected the outcome; the arbitrator's interpretation — that no implied right to apply for EOT exists absent an express term and related findings on delays, LAD, VO and evidence evaluation — fell within her jurisdiction and was supported by the contract and evidence; accordingly the setting aside application was dismissed and the enforcement application was allowed.
26 Sept 2023

M.E.I. PROJECT ENGINEERS SDN BHD SYARIKAT SUCCESS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-15-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-15-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found MEI failed to prove on balance that the Award conflicted with public policy or that there was a breach of natural justice materially affecting the outcome; the arbitrator had considered submissions and evidence (including issues concerning MA6 and MA7) and provided reasons; MEI’s complaint amounted to a merits challenge not permissible under s 37; therefore the Setting Aside Application was dismissed and the Enforcement Application allowed.
26 Jun 2023

TOSHIBA ELEVATOR (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD ENG HAN ENGINEERING SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-51-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-51-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found no breach of natural justice or public policy: the arbitrator considered matters within the parties' submissions and within her mandate, drawing on permissible expertise; errors of fact or law did not justify setting aside under section 37; accordingly the application to set aside (OS 44) was dismissed and the enforcement/entry of judgment in terms of the Award (OS 51) was granted with costs.
27 Mar 2023

PEMPETISYEN SPK-SENTOSA CORPORATION BERHAD (DALAM PENGGULUNGAN) TRW BOULEVARD SQUARE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-237-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-237-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Petition was dismissed because the Petitioner was not a creditor of the Respondent for the purposes of presenting the winding-up petition: the Consent Judgment did not constitute an assignment in writing by the assignor as required by s 4(3) Civil Law Act 1956 and the underlying contract contained a non-assignment clause making consent a precondition, so the statutory demand was ineffective and the Petitioner lacked locus to present the petition.
1 Aug 2022

PEMPETISYEN Thalia Rohaina binti Abdul Latiff for the Petitioner [Messrs Rohaina & Co.] Teoh Chye Yi and Ng Sai Yeang for the Respondent [Messrs Tetuan Raja, Darryl & Loh] PIHAK TERKILAN Angel Ngu for the Bank Pembangunan Malaysia [Messrs L

Citation

WA-28NCC-925-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-925-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court, exercising its discretion under s465(1) Companies Act 2016, dismissed the winding up petition because the respondent was under receivership with secured creditors, the business and essential contracts were being preserved, the power plant produced improved cashflow and supplied public electricity such that winding up would yield no practical benefit to creditors and would risk public interest; preservation of the going concern outweighed the petitioner's right to wind up.
11 Feb 2021

MERIDIAN CONTRACTS SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 530788-P) BAUER (M) SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 121194-X)

Citation

W-02(NCVC)(W)-1567-07/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCVC
Case number

W-02(NCVC)(W)-1567-07/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court concluded the High Court had failed properly to appreciate the evidence; Clause 2 of the Settlement Agreement fixed the Appellant's entitlement at 32.70% and could not be unilaterally reduced by the Respondent or displaced by without‑prejudice negotiations or post‑hoc conduct; accordingly the appeal was allowed, the High Court order set aside and judgment entered for the Appellant with interest and costs.