GLOMAC KRISTAL SDN BHD v NORTON CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Case Significance
GLOMAC KRISTAL SDN BHD v NORTON CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated November 23, 2025 (citation: wa-24carb-30-07-2025). <p>Glomac Kristal sought to set aside a PAM arbitration final award under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, alleging breach of natural justice and failure by the arbitrator to consider material submissions, while Norton Construction cross-applied to enforce the award under section 38. The court held that Glomac Kristal's complaints amounted to challenges on the merits and contractual interpretation rather than grounds for setting aside, and that the high threshold for curial intervention w The case was decided by Rajes Raghavji. Counsel appearing: Hasnan Hamzah (counsel for plaintiff), Tunku Ahmad Munawwir bin Tunku Ahmad Mustaffa (counsel for plaintiff), Yap Chean Hong (counsel for defendant).
Summary
Glomac Kristal sought to set aside a PAM arbitration final award under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, alleging breach of natural justice and failure by the arbitrator to consider material submissions, while Norton Construction cross-applied to enforce the award under section 38. The court held that Glomac Kristal's complaints amounted to challenges on the merits and contractual interpretation rather than grounds for setting aside, and that the high threshold for curial intervention was not met. The setting aside application was dismissed with costs and the award was registered as a judgment of the High Court.
What was the outcome of GLOMAC KRISTAL SDN BHD v NORTON CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD?
<p>Glomac Kristal sought to set aside a PAM arbitration final award under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, alleging breach of natural justice a...