Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
AGILE PJD DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CHINA CONSTRUCTION YANGTZE RIVER (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. foundation of plaintiff's winding-up application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments for and against the fortuna injunction. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. legal framework for fortuna injunctions. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. binding nature of adjudication decisions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. assessment of bona fide disputes and commercial solvency. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. allowance of concurrent remedies in enforcement actions. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 7. grounds for dismissal of the fortuna injunction application. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
[1] This was the Plaintiff's application for a Fortuna injunction to restrain the Defendant from filing a winding up petition based on a statutory notice of demand dated 29 February 2024 ("this Application").
[2] The statutory notice was founded upon the Corrected Adjudication Decision dated 20 February 2024 ("Corrected Adjudication Decision" or "Adjudication Decision". This Application was brought under ss 50 and 51(2) of the Specific Relief Act 1950 .
A] Salient Background Facts
[3] By letter of award dated 9 December 2016, the Plaintiff engaged the Defendant as the main contractor to carry out construction
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
