SETIA AWAN MANAGEMENT SDN BHD vs SPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 MarsdenLR 2577

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SETIA AWAN MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD – Respondent

Table of Content
1. nature of arbitration agreement. (Para 1 , 10 , 11)
2. high court's interpretation of arbitration agreement validity. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. arguments favoring validity of arbitration agreement. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. key components not required for arbitration agreement. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. criteria for deciding on arbitration agreement. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. arbitral tribunal's authority concerning jurisdiction. (Para 87 , 88 , 89 , 90)
7. final decision to stay proceedings in favor of arbitration. (Para 107)

Lee Swee Seng JCA:

[1] The arbitration agreement here is rather uncommon but simple enough to be understood even on first reading. It gives the parties to the contract an option, in the event of a dispute, to either go to court or proceed with arbitration. When a dispute did arise in this matter, one party proceeded with filing a writ action in court only to be met by the other party applying to stay the court proceedings on the ground that there is an arbitration agreement that requires the dispute to be referred to arbitration.

Before The High court

[2] The High court dismissed the stay application made under s 10 of the Arbitration Act

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 MarsdenLR 2577

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYASETIA AWAN MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – AppellantVersusSPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SETIA AWAN MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD – Respondent