Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 15 cipaa

Legal area

Court

4 Oct 2024

TID DESIGN (M) SDN BHD AKRIVIS TEGAS ENGINEERING

Citation

WA-24C-42-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-42-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The adjudication decision dated 26.2.2024 cannot be enforced because it was made against 'Akrivis Tegas Engineering', a trade name of a sole proprietorship lacking separate legal personality; an adjudication or judgment against a non-existent legal entity is invalid as a matter of law, and therefore the enforcement application is dismissed with costs.
15 May 2020

PANZANA ENTERPRISE SDN BHD MKP BUILDERS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C-42-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-42-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court held plaintiff satisfied statutory threshold of s16 CIPAA but did not demonstrate clear and unequivocal error by adjudicator on lawfulness of termination; balancing competing cash‑flow needs and evidence of defendant's precarious finances warranted a conditional stay rather than unconditional stay; ordered partial immediate payments to adjudicated subcontractor/supplier amounts and staged payment of the balance into an interest‑bearing stakeholder account, with automatic revocation on default.
27 Feb 2019

ISKANDAR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SJIC BINA SDN BHD

Citation

J-02(C)(A)-1345-06/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

C
Case number

J-02(C)(A)-1345-06/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Federal Court's ruling in Bauer establishes that CIPAA is prospective only; therefore CIPAA does not apply to construction contracts made before 15 April 2014 and the Court of Appeal is bound to follow that decision, requiring reversal of its earlier conclusion that CIPAA applied in this case.

Malaysia Case Law

TID DESIGN (M) SDN BHD AKRIVIS TEGAS ENGINEERING

PANZANA ENTERPRISE SDN BHD MKP BUILDERS SDN BHD

ISKANDAR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SJIC BINA SDN BHD