SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
SMCC MALAYSIA SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
WAH LOON (M) SDN BHD & OTHER CASES – Respondent
[Originating Summons Nos: WA-24C-41-03/2025 WA-24C-55-03/2025 & WA-24C-56-03/2025]



Petitioner Advocates:M K Chen,Quek Hwee Yee ,Respondent Advocate: Keinan Yeo

Adjudication decisions under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act are enforceable unless substantial evidence of procedural unfairness or bias is established; challenges must meet stringent criteria for stay or setting aside.

Headnote:(A) Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act, 2012 - Sections 15(b), 15(c), 16(1)(b), and 28 - Adjudication proceedings involving the enforcement and setting aside of an Adjudication Decision - Contractor appointed subcontractor; disputes arose regarding payment claims and back-charges. (Paras 2-6, 10-11, 50-71)

(B) Denial of natural justice - Allegations of bias, lack of impartiality in adjudication process, and procedural fairness not substantiated based on evidence presented. (Paras 11-22, 39-48)

(C) Criteria for stay of adjudication decision - Must demonstrate clear error or special circumstances; general dissatisfaction with adjudicator's decision is insufficient. (Paras 61-69)

Facts of the case:
The case involved three Originating Summons related to a payment dispute between a contractor and its subcontractor under the Act, specifically concerning claims and counterclaims for unpaid sums. (Paras 1-4)

Findings of Court:
Court dismissed the application to set aside the Adjudication Decision and allowed the enforcement of the Adjudication Decision. (Paras 50, 52)

Issues: Key issues revolved around the claims of natural justice violations and the criteria for staying the Adjudication Decision. (Paras 10, 56)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the contractual framework allows for adjudication decisions to coexist with other legal proceedings, emphasizing that procedural errors must be materially significant to affect the process. (Paras 30, 37)

Result: OS 55 dismissed; OS 41 allowed; OS 56 dismissed.

Table of Content
1. introduction of originating summons and key background facts. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. wah loon's basis for challenging the adjudication decision. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. explanation of denial of natural justice. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
4. arguments on adjudicator's independence and impartiality. (Para 33 , 39 , 40 , 41)
5. final orders and conclusions on applications. (Para 50 , 58 , 70)
JUDGMENT

Azlan Sulaiman J:

Introduction

[1] These three Originating Summons are connected by an Adjudication Decision dated 19 August 2024 ("Adjudication Decision") that SMCC Malaysia Sdn Bhd ("SMCC") obtained against Wah Loon (M) Sdn Bhd ("Wah Loon") under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act, 2012 ("Act").

[2] In order of filing:

(i) by Originating Summons No: WA-24C-41-03/2025 ("OS 41"), SMCC is applying under s 28 of the Act to enforce the Adjudication Decision against Wah Loon;

(ii) by Originating Summons No: WA-24C-55-03/2025 ("OS 55"), Wah Loon is applying to set the Adjudication Decision aside under ss 15(b) and 15(c) of the Act; and

(iii) by Originating Summons No: WA-24C-56-03/2025 ("OS 56"), Wah Loon is applying to stay the Adjudication Decision under s 16(1)(b) of the Act pending the disposal of Kuala Lumpur High Court Civil Suit No: WA-22C-17-03/2025 ("Civil Suit").

[3] Deciding it prudent to hear all three Originating Summons together, I will decide OS 55 first followed by OS 41 and then only OS 56. If the Adjudication Decision is set aside, then there will be nothing left to enforce or stay. Likewise, only if the Adjudication Decision is to be enforced should a stay of it come into issue.

Salient Background Facts

[4] After Wah Loon had been appointed as contractor for the "Detailed Design, Authority Submission/Permitting, Supply, Delivery, Installation, Testing and Commissioning and Support During Defects Liability Period of Project Lion A New 4 MW IT Power, Greenfield Data Centre for Bridge Data Centres Malaysia II Sdn Bhd in Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur" ("Project"), by a Letter of Award dated 8 December 2020 ("LOA") read with a Modified Subcontracting Purchase Order dated 29 January 2021 ("PO") (collectively, "Contract"), Wah Loon appointed SMCC as its subcontractor to carry out and complete the what is called the CSA related works (including the design thereof) ("Works") for the Project

[5] SMCC completed the Works on or around 20 November 2022, almost 4 months after the extended completion date.

[6] On 6 November 2023, SMCC issued a Payment Claim under the Act to Wah Loon to claim payment of the sum of RM25,818,142.28. In response, Wah Loon claimed against SMCC back-charges and costs in the sum of RM7,878,988.50 as well as Liquidated and Ascertained Damages ("LAD") in the sum of RM3,630,000.00 (collectively, "Wah Loon's Claim").

[7] Paragraph 149 of the Adjudication Decision which contains the outcome of the adjudication proceedings, is depicted below:

M. DETERMINATION

149 THE TRIBUNAL THEREFORE DECIDES AND AWARDS AS FOLLOWS:

[1] The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the Sum of RM10,324,319.09 being Interim Payment Sum for work done under the Sub-contract (see para 131 above);

[2] The Respondent shall pay late payment interest of RM86,199.44 for the late payment of net sums due under Interim Payment Certificates No 1 to 18 (see para 136 above);

[3] The Respondent shall bear the costs of the Adjudicator's fee and the AIAC administrative fees, the registration fee and the appointment fee, to be disbursed by the AIAC from deposits held or by Claimant's recoupment from the Respondent, as appropriate;

[4] The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the all-in sum of RM90,000.00 for the Claimant's costs of preparation of submissions and documentation & representation, inclusive of all out-of pocket expenses and SST;

[5] The AIAC shall refund the RM2,000.00 held as deposit for Tribunal expenses to the paying Parties, and that part which is the Respondent's portion, if any, shall be paid over to the Claimant with an appro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top