CHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD vs KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 208

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
CHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KERAJAAN MALAYSIA – Respondent

Table of Content
1. per the arbitration act, the court reviews questions posed following an arbitral award. (Para 1 , 2 , 16)
2. substantial performance must meet specified contract standards for claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 17 , 26 , 34)
3. proper testing methodologies and performance specifications are core to contractual obligations. (Para 5 , 6 , 27 , 33)
4. determination of damages must align with the contract's specified performance and obligations. (Para 19 , 22 , 42)
5. judicial intervention in arbitration outcomes is limited to legal questions impacting party rights. (Para 43 , 63 , 64)

Varghese George Varughese JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appellant had, pursuant to ss 42 and 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005 (" AA "), posed 10 questions for determination by the High Court arising from a Final Award ("Award") published on 15 July 2013 by the Honourable Arbitrator, Mr Chong Thaw Sing ("the Arbitrator"). The appellant was the claimant in the arbitration proceedings.

[2] The learned Judicial Commissioner ("the learned judge"), who dealt with those questions, declined however, in net effect, to interfere with the Award, save for a variation downwards of the quantum of damages awarded to the re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 208

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYACHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD – AppellantVersusKERAJAAN MALAYSIA – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
CHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KERAJAAN MALAYSIA – Respondent