GUANGXI DEV & CAP SDN BHD vs SYCAL BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 2494

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GUANGXI DEV & CAP SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SYCAL BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Firoz Hussein,Frank Loh,Choo Shi Jin,Elina Lim ,Respondent Advocate: Wong Hin Loong,Esther Chow Ruen Xin,Shafrina Shahidan

Table of Content
1. introduction to appeals and high court decisions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of agreements and disputes between parties. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 11)
3. summary of adjudication decisions and their implications. (Para 8 , 9)
4. contentions regarding natural justice and expert witnesses. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
5. statutory framework for natural justice under cipaa. (Para 18)

[1] There are two appeals before us. They emanate from the orders of the Shah Alam High Court dated 9 March 2017. The plaintiff in the High Court, and the appellant here, had filed two applications to set aside two adjudication decisions which were delivered pursuant to the Construction Industry Payment Adjudication Act 2012 ("CIPAA 2012"). The applications were dismissed by the High Court.

[2] Aggrieved with the decision, the appellant filed the instant appeals. After hearing the parties and taking into consideration the written submissions, we allowed the appeals and set aside the orders of the High Court. Our reasons for doing so now follow and will constitute the judgment of the Court.

Background Facts

[3] By a Letter of Award dated 2 November 2011, the appellant appointed the respondent as the design

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 2494

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAGUANGXI DEV & CAP SDN BHD – AppellantVersusSYCAL BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GUANGXI DEV & CAP SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SYCAL BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent