25 September 2025

Our Senior Associate, Agesh Jeyaratnam from our Construction Dispute Resolution Practice Group, succeeded in applying for an enforcement of an Adjudication Decision (“AD”) for RM5 Million and resisted an application to set aside the AD in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur (“High Court”) in favour of the client against the counterparty.

Our client had obtained an Adjudication Decision for the sum RM5 Million against the counterparty.

Our client then applied to the High Court for the AD to be enforced, whereas the counterparty applied to set aside the AD on the basis of alleged excess of jurisdiction and breach of natural justice.

Upon considering the submissions of both parties, the High Court found that:-

(a) While the adjudicator had exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing certain directions, those directions could be severed and would not affect our client’s claims.

(b) There was no breach of natural justice. The counterparty’s arguments were not grounds to warrant the setting aside of the AD.

As such, the High Court allowed our client’s application to enforce the AD with costs and dismissed the counterparty’s setting aside application with costs.

For more insight into this area of law, please contact our Partners in the Construction Dispute Resolution Practice Group:
Kuhendran Thanapalasingam
Susan Tan Shu Shuen
Esther Tan
Koh Shien Lin

Please email your details to look@zulrafique.com.my if you would like to subscribe to our Knowledge Centre.

Let’s Connect!
➭ LINKEDIN: Zul Rafique & Partners
➭ INSTAGRAM: @zrplaw