JUDGMENT

Moses Susayan JC:

[1] The defendant filed an application to stay the court proceedings and refer the dispute to arbitration under s 10(1) of the Arbitration Act 2005 . The plaintiff argues that there is no valid arbitration clause in the Development and Contra Transaction Agreement ("DACT"), specifically pointing to cl 18, which allows disputes to be referred either to arbitration or to a court. The defendant contends that the DACT requires disputes to be resolved through arbitration and seeks a stay of the court proceedings on this basis.

Brief Facts

[2] The plaintiff, a subsidiary of Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad ("SPNB"), entered into a DACT with the defendant, a property developer, on 17th May 2018 for a residential development project in Sitiawan, Perak. Under the DACT, the defendant was to develop the project, and the plaintiff was to purchase 20 plots of land, transferring 1,169 units valued at RM248,035,014.00 as part of the financing. Disputes later arose regarding the timely transfer of land and compliance with the DACT's terms, leading the defendant to terminate the agreement in July 2021 and demand compensation of RM311,897,723.00. In response, the plaintiff fi