JUDGMENT

Wong Kian Kheong J:

A. Three Novel Issues

[1] This originating summons (OS) is a case of first impression regarding the following three questions:

(1) does an adjudicator have power under s 12(1) read with s 25(p) of the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA) to extend the "45 working days" time period prescribed in s 12(2)(a) of the CIPAA (Prescribed Time Period [s 12(2)(a)]) for the adjudicator to "make" the adjudication decision?; and

(2) if the answer to the above issue is "no":

(a) whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel bars a party against whom an adjudication decision is made (X) from applying to Court to set aside the adjudication decision on the ground that the adjudication decision is void under s 12(3) of the CIPAA because the adjudication decision has been "made" beyond the Prescribed Time Period [s 12(2)(a)] (Breach [s 12(2)]); and

(b) can X acquiesce to the Breach [s 12(2)]?

B. Background

[2] By way of a construction contract dated 15 December 2018 (Contract), the plaintiff company (plaintiff) had appointed the defendant company (defendant) to build a three-storey car service workshop and office in Selangor Darul Ehsan (Works).

[3] The defe