MRCB Builders Sdn Bhd v China State Construction Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd

wa-24c-53-04-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 22 August 2023 • WA-24C-53-04/2023 • 28 min read

20 cases cited (0 SG, 20 foreign)

Catchwords

Whether the Adjudication Proceedings is initiated by CSCE in furtherance of a fraud, thereby being oppressive and an abuse of process - Whether the Adjudication Proceedings is unreasonable in view of the fact that the AD arising out of it is likely to be set aside under s 15(a) CIPAA or stayed under paragraph 16(1)(b) CIPAA pending the disposal of Suit 125 - Whether the Adjudicator has no jurisdiction to determine the Adjudication Proceedings, in view of the fraud, Suit 125, the Expert Application and the SD by the QS & Architect, which has the effect of questioning the integrity of the certification process of PC No. 38 and IPC No. 38

Judges (1)

Aliza binti Sulaiman Delivered

Counsel (6)

Belden Firm Selva Mookiah & Associates Firm Georgina Lim Counsel Defendant Sajitha Suresh Counsel Plaintiff Suria Juan Pillai Counsel Plaintiff Terence Loh Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

China State Construction Engineering Sdn Bhd Respondent MRCB BUILDERS Sdn Bhd Applicant

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)

Cases Cited (20)

UK (2)

[2009] EWHC 2645 [2010] EWHC 457

MY (18)

[2012] 2 MLJ 852 [2012] 9 MLJ 181 [2014] 3 MLJ 882 [2014] 7 MLJ 18 [2015] 11 MLJ 499 [2017] 4 MLJ 697 [2017] MLJU 2165 [2018] 2 MLJ 22 [2018] MLJU 861 [2020] 6 AMR 258 [2020] 6 MLJ 224 [2020] MLJU 1021 [2020] MLJU 1431 [2021] 6 CLJ 779 [2021] 6 MLJ 1 [2021] MLJU 229 [2021] MLJU 537 [2022] MLJU 202

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-24c-53-04-2023)