QUEK PECK KEOW v EXTRA EXCEL (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD

ja-24nccarb-2-04-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 6 November 2024 • JA-24NCC(ARB)-2-04/2022 • 11 min read
6 cases cited (0 SG, 6 foreign)

Outcome

Conclusion [26] In conclusion, I allow the Plaintiff’s OS with costs. The date for the assessment of damages will be fixed by this Court in due course.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (ja-24nccarb-2-04-2022). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Arbitration agreement - originating summons filed by the Plaintiff seeking for a few reliefs, inter alia, to declare the impugned arbitration agreement is null and void - the Court still has the duty to peruse the impugned arbitration agreement before it decides whether the agreement is valid and operative and relevant to the proceedings - it is incumbent upon the trial judge to scrutinise and inspect the impugned arbitration agreement and the entire factual matrix of the case before making a finding on the validity of such agreement - the Court ought not to close its eyes and simply accept the validity of an impugned arbitration agreement just because there is an arbitration agreement without giving due consideration to other relevant factors

Practice Areas

Arbitration Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Shamsulbahri bin Haji Ibrahim Delivered

Counsel (7)

Azwad Ihsan & Co. Firm Mohanadass & Partners Firm Fadhil Ihsan Counsel Plaintiff Johanan Puthucheary Counsel Defendant Shamelan Lonen Counsel Defendant Syahmi Nawawi Counsel Plaintiff Thomas Shaun Mathews Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

EXTRA EXCEL Sdn Bhd Respondent Quek Peck Keow Applicant

Statutes Cited

Arbitration Act 2005 (Cap 646)
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (6)

UK (1)
[1915] 3 KB 167
MY (5)
[2016] 5 MLJ 417 [2016] 9 CLJ 1 [2019] 5 MLJ 1 [2019] 7 CLJ 395 [2020] 4 CLJ 301

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ja-24nccarb-2-04-2022)