HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
BINA JAYA MANTAP SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PETRONAS SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contractual obligations and breaches (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. plaintiff's contentions regarding unreasonable treatment (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 3. defendant's responses to bribery allegations (Para 27 , 28 , 34 , 35) |
| 4. evaluation of unconscionable conduct (Para 45) |
| 5. arbitration processes and interim measures (Para 46) |
[1] There are two applications before the court: encls (1) and (6). Enclosure (1) is the plaintiff's application for an injunction to restrain the defendant from demanding and/or realising the bank guarantee that the plaintiff provided under the contractual arrangements between itself and the defendant. Enclosure (6) is the defendant's application for a stay of the present proceedings pending arbitration.
[2] As a result of the unfolding, development and intervening events in respect of these proceedings which are well recorded, and more particularly with the consent of the parties to treat encl (1) as an application under s 11 of the Arbitration Act 2005 (Act 646); and encl (6) for stay under s 10 of the same Act; accordingly encl (1) will be treated as an application for an interim injunction pending arbitration under
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.