JUDGMENT

Noor Hisham Ismail J:

Introduction

[1] There are two matters before this Court involving the same parties. Both matters relate to an Adjudication Decision dated 20 June 2023 made by the Adjudicator under Construction Industry and Payment Adjudication Act 2012 ("CIPAA").

[2] The first matter, filed as Originating Summons JA-24C-19-08/2023 ("OS 19"), is an application by the plaintiff Era Universe Development Sdn Bhd ("P") to set aside pursuant to s 15(b) and (d) CIPAA 2012 the Adjudication Decision which is in favor of the defendant Ken Lip Constructions & Trading Sdn Bhd ("D").

[3] The second matter, filed as Originating Summons JA-24C-21-08/2023 ("OS 21"), is an application by D under s 28 CIPAA 2012 to enforce the Adjudication Decision against P.

[4] Subsequent to the above, on 7 November 2023 by way of consent, both OS 19 and OS 21 were consolidated and heard together by this Court .

[5] A stay of all proceedings was also granted to P on 28 March 2024 pending the disposal of OS 19 and OS 21.

[6] On 28 August 2024, after hearing arguments from both parties, this Court dismissed OS 19 and allowed OS 21. P has appealed against both decisions to the Court of Appeal via two (2) notices of appeal in respect of both OS 19 and OS 21. Since the matter was previously consolidated and heard together before this Court , these grounds of judgment constitute the full reasoning of this Court in dismissing OS 19 and allowing OS 21.

Factual Background Of The Case

[7] P appointed D as the main contractor by way of Letter of Award dated 7 March 2016 to carry out construction work and to complete the development of a project concerning a housing development.

[8] For ease of reference, the above project would be referred to as the project throughout these grounds of judgment.

[9] D had then completed the project and the works undertaken leading to a certificate of payment to be issued by the project architect for the works done and its value accordingly.

[10] Pursuant to the above, part payments were made by P to D but an outstanding sum of RM5,875,777.22 remained unpaid under the certificate of payment and invoices issued.

[11] D then issued a notice of adjudication dated 6 March 2023 to P and to the AIAC (Asian International Arbitration Centre) referring the dispute to adjudication pursuant to CIPAA 2012.

[12] Encik Jong Chien Hui was duly appointed ("adjudicator") to adjudicate the dispute between parties.

[13] The adjudicator issued the Adjudication Decision on 20 June 2023 after having heard both parties on the merits of their claims including their respective response and defenses. Accordingly, P was ordered to pay the adjudication award sum of RM5,875,777.22 together with costs of RM61,289.00 and interest within 14 working days of the decision to D.

[14] Sufficient to say here that P did not comply with the adjudication decision above. This led to D filing OS 21 on 2 August 2023 to obtain leave to enforce the adjudication decision against P as if it is a judgment or order from the High Court . On the other hand, P on 10 August 2023 filed OS 19 to set aside the adjudication decision under s 15 CIPAA 2012.

Cause Papers Filed By Parties

[15] In respect of OS 19 the following cause papers were filed:

(a) Originating Summons dated 1 August 2023 ("OS 19");

(b) P's affidavit in support affirmed by Mohd Radzi Bin Ab Wahab on 1 August 2023;

(c) D's affidavit in-reply affirmed by Yan Hock Soon on 7 September 2023; and

(d) P's affidavit in-reply affirmed by Mohd Radzi Bin Ab Wahab on 5 October 2023.

[16] In respect of OS 21, the following cause papers were filed:

(a) Originating Summons dated 2 August 2023 ("OS 21");

(b) D's affidavit in support affirmed by Yan Hock Soon on 2 August 2023;

(c) P's affidavit in-reply affirmed by Mohd Radzi Bin Ab Wahab on 30 August 2023 and.

(d) D's affidavit in-reply affirmed by Yan Hock Soon on 11 September 2023.

OS 19

[17] The law relating to setting aside of an adjudication decision can be found in s 15 CIPAA 2012 which pr