Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
MAMMOTH EMPIRE CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
STAM ENGINEERING SDN BHD & ANOTHER CASE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of sub-contract agreement and payment claim procedure. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. service of payment claims must comply with statutory provisions. (Para 4) |
| 3. details on adjudication decision and enforcement processes. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. adjudication decisions must be subject to enforcement as judgments. (Para 8) |
| 5. respondent's grounds for setting aside adjudication decision. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. services at usual business locations versus registered offices. (Para 13 , 14 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. claims of procedural defects must be supported by substantial evidence. (Para 18) |
| 8. the adjudicator's discretion in procedural matters is upheld by the court. (Para 21 , 26) |
| 9. burden of proof in adjudication processes. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 10. applications to stay adjudication decisions must follow statutory grounds. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
[1] Mammoth Empire Construction Sdn Bhd ("Respondent") had vide a Work Order dated 1 February 2017 appointed Stam Engineering Sdn Bhd ("Claimant") as sub-contractor for a construction project. The total contract sum for the sub-contract was RM4,450,925.00.
[2] The Claimant complained that the Respondent had not made payment for work done on the sub-contract
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
