Section 30 of the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA) provides a statutory mechanism for a successful party in an adjudication (usually a subcontractor) to request direct payment of the adjudicated sum from the principal, in the event the unsuccessful party (usually a main contractor) failed to pay.   The successful party must establish the following elements to successfully invoke Section 30:   • an adjudication decision has been obtained in its f

The recent Court of Appeal decision in Setia Awan Management Sdn Bhd v SPNB Aspirasi Sdn Bhd  [2025] CLJU 982 has added a significant dimension to Malaysian arbitration jurisprudence.   This decision affirms that an arbitration clause which provides an option to litigate or arbitrate is nonetheless a valid arbitration agreement once a party exercises the option to arbitrate. This ruling is a strong endorsement of party autonomy and judicial minimalism, reinforcing Malaysia's

Most construction projects involve drawn-out legal disputes that sometimes span years and frequently include parties filing countless lawsuits, adjudications, arbitrations, appeals and so forth. In the process, necessarily, there will be winners and “runners-up”. However, what happens when these “ runners-up ” face winding-up proceedings over outstanding judgment debts?   Recently,  High Court in Lucksoon Metal Works Sdn Bhd v Propel Synergy Sn Bhd  [2025] MLJU 110,   the Hig

Under Order 6 rule 7 of Rules of Court 2012 (ROC 2012), the courts are empowered with the jurisdiction to extend the validity of a writ. This alert discusses the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Charern Properties Sdn Bhd v Choong Nam Father & Sons Construction Sdn Bhd [2024] CLJU 2119 on the application of such procedural rule. Background Facts Both the Appellant and Respondent were private limited companies. The Appellant was the defendant in the action at the High Court wherea

In Swiss-ray Asia Healthcare Co Ltd v V Medical Services M Sdn Bhd [2024] 8 CLJ 21 , the Court of Appeal recently answered a legal issue as follows:   “ When contracting parties have agreed to resolve disputes through arbitration and one party issues a notice under Section 466(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2016 (CA 2016) to wind up the other, while the other seeks a Fortuna injunction to prevent this on the basis that the debt is disputed, must the party challenging the winding-

Parties enter into commercial contracts with various business considerations. Sometimes, this leads to novel (and often untested) dispute resolution clauses being tailored by the parties. Recently, the Court of Appeal in  Asia Pacific Higher Learning Sdn Bhd v Stamford College (Malacca) Sdn Bhd  [2024] MLJU 1712 was posed the question of whether to stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration in the context of a particularly peculiar arbitration agreement.   Background   

A fortuna injunction is an injunction to restrain the filing of a winding-up petition. It bears its name from the case of Fortuna Holdings Pty Ltd v The Deputy Commissioner  of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia [1978] VR 83. There are two principles governing the grant of a fortuna injunction:   (i) Where the presentation of a winding-up petition has no chance of success in law or in fact; or   (ii) Where the petitioner of the winding-up asserts a disputed claim.   In

The doctrine of kompetenz-kompetenz  is reflected in Section 18 of the Arbitration Act 2005 [1] , in which the arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction including determining the existence of the arbitration agreement. However, it is pertinent to note that the foundation of an arbitrator’s jurisdiction is the agreement entered into between the disputants. If such an agreement is absent, then, there is no jurisdiction [2] . Hence, if the validity of the arbitration ag

Under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (Act), an adjudicator is required to determine the adjudicated amount and the time and manner the adjudicated amount is to be paid within the adjudication decision. The definition of “adjudicated amount” is important as it is used repeatedly in various provisions of the Act, including Sections 16, 28, 29 and 30. In the context of Section 30, this definition becomes crucial, as it grants the prevailing party the