YS CHONG ENTERPRISE SDN BHD v PERKASA JAUHARI SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION)

j-02ncca-464-03-2025 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 14 June 2026 • J-02(NCC)(A)-464-03/2025 • 31 min read
2 cases cited (0 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

For all the reasons above, we dismiss Appeal 464 and, consequentially, Appeal 465. We make the following orders: (a) The order of the High Court dated 11.3.2025 in Winding- Up Petition No. JA-28NCC-157-11/2022, winding up YS Chong Enterprise Sdn Bhd, and the consequential order appointing a private liquidator for YS Chong, are affirmed; (b) For the avoidance of doubt, we hold that, the JBHC Judgment delivered on 21.7.2020 having constituted the Final Determination for the purposes of s.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) (j-02ncca-464-03-2025). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 – a question of considerable Doctrinal importance at the intersection of construction law and insolvency law: what is the effect, upon a winding-up order against a company which was founded upon an adjudication decision obtained by that company’s creditor, of a subsequent final determination by the court which conclusively reverses that adjudication decision on the merits - does the winding up order — by itself, and notwithstanding that the adjudication decision upon which it was founded has been extinguished under s. 13(c) of CIPAA by the final court determination — have the effect of transmuting the adjudication decision into a binding, permanent debt which survives that final determination, and which the CIPAA claimant may thereafter invoke as a mutual set-off under s. 526 of the Companies Act 2016 (“CA 2016”) against a winding-up petition subsequently presented by the aggrieved debtor company whose claims were vindicated in those very court proceedings? - the meaning of “finally decided by arbitration or the court” in s. 13(c), whether final determination means the decision must have been “decided, and no longer open to any form of challenge or appeal.

Practice Areas

Company Law Construction Law

Judges (3)

Dean Wayne Daly Coram Mohd Firuz bin Jaffril Coram Ong Chee Kwan Delivered

Counsel (7)

K. Siladass & Partners Firm S Ravenesan Firm Mandave Singh Gill Counsel Appellant Nurrul Nadia Binti Norriza Counsel Appellant S. Naveennesan Counsel Respondent S. Ravenesan Counsel Respondent Shanker Sivapragasam Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

PERKASA JAUHARI Sdn Bhd (IN LIQUIDATION) Respondent YS CHONG ENTERPRISE Sdn Bhd Appellant

Statutes Cited

Arbitration Act 2005 (Cap 646)
Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (2)

MY (2)
[2020] MLJU 1196 [2020] MLJU 282

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (j-02ncca-464-03-2025)