Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim measures under arbitration act

Legal area

Court

11 Oct 2024

1. ) CHINA MACHINERY ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2. ) CHINA MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT (HK) CO. LTD. 3. ) CHINA MACHINERY INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN & RESEARCH INSTITUTE CO. LTD. 4. ) MATTAN ENGINEERING SDN BHD 1. ) BGMC BRAS POWER SDN BHD 2.

Citation

WA-24C-2-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-2-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to satisfy the high threshold required to restrain a demand on unconditional on‑demand performance bonds: the evidence did not establish a seriously arguable case of unconscionable conduct or that the only realistic inference was unconscionability. The beneficiaries acted within contractual rights (including conducting PR tests and assessing EoT) and the disputes are essentially contractual matters for arbitration. Accordingly, the interlocutory injunctions sought were refused and costs awarded against Plaintiffs.
15 Oct 2021

CYPARK SDN BHD KNM PROCESS SYSTEMS SDN BHD

Citation

B-02(IM)(C)-552-03/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

B-02(IM)(C)-552-03/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held that (1) the High Court has power under s.11 Arbitration Act 2005 to grant interim injunctions to preserve status quo pending arbitration but not power to grant final declarations or damages; (2) non‑joinder of the consortium co‑member was not fatal given the contract structure and Rules of Court; (3) on the facts there was a seriously arguable and strong prima facie case of unconscionability to justify injunctions restraining calls on the two bank guarantees; (4) the High Court properly attached conditions requiring the applicant to maintain validity/enforceability o…
27 Jan 2021

SN AKMIDA HOLDINGS SDN BHD KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-24C(ARB)-39-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24C(ARB)-39-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's applications for interim relief. It held that (1) the court is bound by precedent and statutory regime (s 29 GPA 1956 and s 54 SRA 1950) that injunctions cannot be granted against the Government or its officers, (2) the Schedule to Part II of the Covid-19 Act does not, by express words or necessary implication, include construction contracts entered into by the Government, (3) even if Covid-19 Act applied, the plaintiff failed to prove the elements of s 7 (specific contractual duties, precise measures under Act 342 and causal nexus), and (4) s 10 Covid…

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) CHINA MACHINERY ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2. ) CHINA MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT (HK) CO. LTD. 3. ) CHINA MACHINERY INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN & RESEARCH INSTITUTE CO. LTD. 4. ) MATTAN ENGINEERING SDN BHD 1. ) BGMC BRAS POWER SDN BHD 2.

CYPARK SDN BHD KNM PROCESS SYSTEMS SDN BHD

SN AKMIDA HOLDINGS SDN BHD KERAJAAN MALAYSIA