Arbitration
127 cases · August 2017 to June 2026
Overview
Arbitration appears in 127 reported Malaysia judgments (2017–2026).
In this practice area
Arbitration collects the judgments in which the courts support, supervise or give effect to arbitral dispute resolution under the Arbitration Act 2005. The reasoning concerns the stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration, the enforcement and setting aside of awards, and the boundary between the arbitral process and the courts' own jurisdiction.
The stay of proceedings is a central subject. Judgments examine the mandatory stay under section 10 of the Arbitration Act 2005 and Article 8 of the Model Law, and the approach where a debt subject to an arbitration clause is met by a winding-up petition — the "Fortuna injunction" and the threshold for a stay, dismissal or injunction in that situation. The courts consider how the arbitration legislation interacts with the winding-up jurisdiction, drawing on comparative authority such as Salford Estates and the Privy Council's decision in Sian Participation Corp v Halimeda.
Enforcement forms a second strand. Judgments address the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award registered in the seat court under the New York Convention, and the limited grounds on which an award may be resisted or set aside. The purpose and object of the Arbitration Act 2005 — to give effect to the parties' choice of arbitration with minimal curial interference — frames the analysis, together with the principles of statutory interpretation under section 17A of the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1976 that guide the reading of the Act.
The cases sit predominantly in the High Court, with appeals to the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court on the reach of the arbitration legislation. As a whole the area shows how the Malaysian courts hold parties to their agreement to arbitrate — staying litigation and enforcing awards — while retaining the narrow supervisory role the Act preserves. The recurring interface with the winding-up jurisdiction shows how often a party invokes insolvency to sidestep an agreed arbitration, and how the courts guard the arbitral bargain against it.
Case Volume by Year
2 17
2 18
3 19
1 20
1 21
2 23
23 24
63 25
30 26
2017–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Setting aside — Enforcement — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Scope of submission to arbitration — “New difference” — Whether tribunal exceeded jurisdiction — Whether dispute contemplated by parties — Arbitration Act 2005, s 37(1)(a)(iv), (v) 2 Setting aside — Public policy — Illegality — Regulatory non-compliance — Whether award in conflict with public policy of Malaysia — Threshold — Arbitration Act 2005, s 37(1)(b)(ii), s 37(2) 2 to set aside award — non-recognition of award — grounds enumerated in s.37 are exhaustive and the court cannot set aside an award for reasons other than those that are listed– the court do not sit as an appellate court — the merits before the arbitral tribunal are not open to scrutiny — section 37 of the Arbitration Act -Section 39 of the Arbitration Act Arbitration Law — Waiver — Estoppel — Not specifically pleaded in claim — relied on during course of proceeding — can be extended by conducts of parties — can be considered by the arbitrator based on the facts of the case — accepting the application for extension — not rejecting the application 2 Arbitration Act 2005 (“AA”) — Award — Recognition and enforcement of award 2 Respondent was allegedly in breach of express and implied terms of contract in respect of supply of cost-plus valves and that Appellant suffered substantial loss and damages — Whether respondent was in breach of express terms of contract — Whether valves supplied did not correspond with its description and were not of merchantable quality — Whether Appellant suffered substantial loss and damage in respect of valves which had been replaced 2 Whether breach of rules of natural justice occurred during arbitration and in connection with making award — Arbitral Tribunal addressed on issue not raised or addressed by parties — Tribunal failed to address issues specifically raised in the pleadings by the parties — Whether breach of natural justice — Whether award was in conflict with public policy of Malaysia 2 Stay of court proceedings — Application under s 10 Arbitration Act 2005 — Whether proceedings should be stayed and parties referred to arbitration — Mandatory nature of stay where arbitration agreement exists and no step taken in proceedings 1 Arbitration agreement — Incorporation by reference — Whether reference in letter of appointment to “Conditions of Engagement, Rule 29, 3rd Schedule of Architect Rules 1996” sufficient to incorporate arbitration clause — Section 9(5) Arbitration Act 2005 1 Arbitration clause — Incorporation of standard terms — Whether specific reference to arbitration clause necessary — Applicability of Ajwa for Food Industries Co (MIGOP), Egypt v Pacific Inter-Link Sdn Bhd 1 Kompetenze-kompetenz — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Whether questions concerning validity, scope and applicability of arbitration clause to be determined primarily by arbitral tribunal — Section 18(1) Arbitration Act 2005 1 Separability doctrine — Whether arbitration clause survives challenge to validity of underlying contract — Whether alleged invalidity of letter of appointment affected arbitration clause — Section 18(2) Arbitration Act 2005 1 Stay application — “Before taking any other step in proceedings” — Whether entry of appearance and attendance at e-review constituted step inconsistent with right to arbitrate — Section 10(1) Arbitration Act 2005 1 Architectural consultancy agreement — Architects Rules 1996 — Whether Conditions of Engagement and arbitration clause applied despite absence of prescribed Memorandum of Agreement under Rule 29 1 Arbitration agreement — Null and void — Inoperative — Incapable of being performed — Whether any statutory exception under s 10(1) established on affidavit evidence 1 Scope of arbitration agreement — Tortious claims — Whether claims framed in professional negligence and wrongful grant of extension of time fell within scope of arbitration clause arising from architectural consultancy services 1 Construction disputes — Architect’s alleged wrongful grant of extensions of time — Claim for loss of liquidated damages — Whether disputes arising from performance of architectural functions arbitrable 1 Interim relief — Performance Bonds — Construction contract involving Government infrastructure project — Application under s 11 Arbitration Act 2005 to restrain beneficiary from making and receiving payment under Performance Bonds pending arbitration — Whether court had jurisdiction notwithstanding Government Proceedings Act 1956 — Whether contractual dispute concerning Design Guarantee Bond established unconscionability sufficient to restrain autonomous Performance Bonds — Held, although serious issues existed for arbitration, no prima facie unconscionability was shown, damages remained an adequate remedy and balance of convenience favoured preservation of contractual security — Application dismissed. 1 Setting aside arbitral award — Application under sections 37(1)(a)(v) and 37(1)(b)(ii) of the Arbitration Act 2005 — Excess of jurisdiction — Public policy — Whether arbitral tribunal exceeded jurisdiction by finding that landlord had affirmed lease and waived tenant’s repudiatory breach — Whether findings on waiver, affirmation, election and effect of non-waiver clause were matters falling within scope of parties’ pleadings and submissions — Whether tribunal’s reliance on foreign authorities concerning waiver and affirmation constituted decision beyond parties’ contemplation — Whether alleged failure to expressly consider contractual non-waiver clause amounted to breach of natural justice — Whether breach of natural justice ground could be raised through submissions when not pleaded in originating summons or affidavits — Whether actual or real prejudice established — Whether award rested on multiple independent findings supporting affirmation of lease — Limited curial intervention — Finality of arbitral awards 1 Whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear the Plaintiff's OS despite the arbitration agreement in Clause 34.5 of the PAM Contract 2006 — Whether the Court can decide the interpretation of Clause 30.10 and whether a valid dispute exists — Whether the Plaintiff’s claim that there is no dispute allows this Court to exercise jurisdiction — Whether the Plaintiff is barred from re-litigating the matter after the Court of Appeal’s judgment directing arbitration — Whether the Court of Appeal’s prior decision precludes this Court from hearing the OS — Whether the issue of dispute under Clause 30.10 is for the arbitrator to decide. 1 Interim measures — Injunction pending arbitration — Application to restrain receivers and managers — Whether court may restrain secured creditor’s enforcement pending arbitration — Section 11 Arbitration Act 2005 — Whether s 11 displaces American Cyanamid principles — Whether injunction preserves or alters status quo — Whether interference with receivership justified 1
+ 26 more
Setting aside — Enforcement — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Scope of submission to arbitration — “New difference” — Whether tribunal exceeded jurisdiction — Whether dispute contemplated by parties — Arbitration Act 2005, s 37(1)(a)(iv), (v) 2 cases
Setting aside — Public policy — Illegality — Regulatory non-compliance — Whether award in conflict with public policy of Malaysia — Threshold — Arbitration Act 2005, s 37(1)(b)(ii), s 37(2) 2 cases
to set aside award — non-recognition of award — grounds enumerated in s.37 are exhaustive and the court cannot set aside an award for reasons other than those that are listed– the court do not sit as an appellate court — the merits before the arbitral tribunal are not open to scrutiny — section 37 of the Arbitration Act -Section 39 of the Arbitration Act Arbitration Law — Waiver — Estoppel — Not specifically pleaded in claim — relied on during course of proceeding — can be extended by conducts of parties — can be considered by the arbitrator based on the facts of the case — accepting the application for extension — not rejecting the application 2 cases
Arbitration Act 2005 (“AA”) — Award — Recognition and enforcement of award 2 cases
Respondent was allegedly in breach of express and implied terms of contract in respect of supply of cost-plus valves and that Appellant suffered substantial loss and damages — Whether respondent was in breach of express terms of contract — Whether valves supplied did not correspond with its description and were not of merchantable quality — Whether Appellant suffered substantial loss and damage in respect of valves which had been replaced 2 cases
Whether breach of rules of natural justice occurred during arbitration and in connection with making award — Arbitral Tribunal addressed on issue not raised or addressed by parties — Tribunal failed to address issues specifically raised in the pleadings by the parties — Whether breach of natural justice — Whether award was in conflict with public policy of Malaysia 2 cases
Stay of court proceedings — Application under s 10 Arbitration Act 2005 — Whether proceedings should be stayed and parties referred to arbitration — Mandatory nature of stay where arbitration agreement exists and no step taken in proceedings 1 case
Arbitration agreement — Incorporation by reference — Whether reference in letter of appointment to “Conditions of Engagement, Rule 29, 3rd Schedule of Architect Rules 1996” sufficient to incorporate arbitration clause — Section 9(5) Arbitration Act 2005 1 case
Arbitration clause — Incorporation of standard terms — Whether specific reference to arbitration clause necessary — Applicability of Ajwa for Food Industries Co (MIGOP), Egypt v Pacific Inter-Link Sdn Bhd 1 case
Kompetenze-kompetenz — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Whether questions concerning validity, scope and applicability of arbitration clause to be determined primarily by arbitral tribunal — Section 18(1) Arbitration Act 2005 1 case
Separability doctrine — Whether arbitration clause survives challenge to validity of underlying contract — Whether alleged invalidity of letter of appointment affected arbitration clause — Section 18(2) Arbitration Act 2005 1 case
Stay application — “Before taking any other step in proceedings” — Whether entry of appearance and attendance at e-review constituted step inconsistent with right to arbitrate — Section 10(1) Arbitration Act 2005 1 case
Architectural consultancy agreement — Architects Rules 1996 — Whether Conditions of Engagement and arbitration clause applied despite absence of prescribed Memorandum of Agreement under Rule 29 1 case
Arbitration agreement — Null and void — Inoperative — Incapable of being performed — Whether any statutory exception under s 10(1) established on affidavit evidence 1 case
Scope of arbitration agreement — Tortious claims — Whether claims framed in professional negligence and wrongful grant of extension of time fell within scope of arbitration clause arising from architectural consultancy services 1 case
Construction disputes — Architect’s alleged wrongful grant of extensions of time — Claim for loss of liquidated damages — Whether disputes arising from performance of architectural functions arbitrable 1 case
Interim relief — Performance Bonds — Construction contract involving Government infrastructure project — Application under s 11 Arbitration Act 2005 to restrain beneficiary from making and receiving payment under Performance Bonds pending arbitration — Whether court had jurisdiction notwithstanding Government Proceedings Act 1956 — Whether contractual dispute concerning Design Guarantee Bond established unconscionability sufficient to restrain autonomous Performance Bonds — Held, although serious issues existed for arbitration, no prima facie unconscionability was shown, damages remained an adequate remedy and balance of convenience favoured preservation of contractual security — Application dismissed. 1 case
Whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear the Plaintiff's OS despite the arbitration agreement in Clause 34.5 of the PAM Contract 2006 — Whether the Court can decide the interpretation of Clause 30.10 and whether a valid dispute exists — Whether the Plaintiff’s claim that there is no dispute allows this Court to exercise jurisdiction — Whether the Plaintiff is barred from re-litigating the matter after the Court of Appeal’s judgment directing arbitration — Whether the Court of Appeal’s prior decision precludes this Court from hearing the OS — Whether the issue of dispute under Clause 30.10 is for the arbitrator to decide. 1 case
Interim measures — Injunction pending arbitration — Application to restrain receivers and managers — Whether court may restrain secured creditor’s enforcement pending arbitration — Section 11 Arbitration Act 2005 — Whether s 11 displaces American Cyanamid principles — Whether injunction preserves or alters status quo — Whether interference with receivership justified 1 case
Scope of arbitration clause — Whether statutory and fiduciary claims arbitrable — Substance over form — Whether claims arise out of or in connection with contractual matrix 1 case
Stay application — Waiver — Whether entry of appearance amounts to step in proceedings — Timing of application — Whether prompt invocation of arbitration 1 case
Conduct of parties — Invocation of dispute resolution mechanism — Whether party estopped from denying arbitration — Approbation and reprobation 1 case
Stay of court proceedings — Arbitration Agreement — Adoption by liquidator — Whether Director General of Insolvency required to adopt arbitration agreement under Section 49 of the Arbitration Act 2005 — Distinction between individual bankruptcy and corporate winding-up — Mandatory stay under Section 10 of the Arbitration Act 2005 — Whether arbitration agreement inoperative or incapable of being performed — Doctrine of separability — Parties Autonomy — Survival of arbitration clause despite winding-up of company — Arbitrability — Dispute arising from pre-insolvency contractual rights — Whether arbitrable post-liquidation — Public policy considerations — Contrast with insolvency-specific remedies 1 case
Court-ordered reference to arbitration — Whether different from submission to arbitration — Whether award obtained pursuant to a court-ordered reference to arbitration may be enforced under the Arbitration Act — Whether enforcement should have been pursuant to section 24A of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 1 case
Stay of proceedings — Section 10 Arbitration Act 2005 — Arbitration clause in AFC Champions League Competition Regulations — Dispute “in connection with the Competition” — Meaning of “Competition” — Claim for unpaid prize money, subsidies and expenses — Liability and quantum admitted — Crystallised debt — Non-payment due to banking compliance and extraterritorial sanctions — No dispute relating to competition — No nexus between claim and arbitration clause — Arbitration clause inapplicable — Court entitled to determine scope of arbitration agreement — Full merits test 1 case
Stay of proceedings — Application for stay under section 10(1) of the Arbitration Act 2005 — Mandatory nature of stay where valid arbitration agreement exists — Principles of "steps in proceedings". 1 case
Agreement — Arbitration or litigation — Construction of arbitration clause in light of phrase “legal proceedings” used — Whether word ‘shall’ used in arbitration clause connoted reference to arbitration as mandatory and not optional — Whether parties original intention to refer dispute to arbitration abandoned by supplemental agreements — Whether failure to give a notice of arbitration would be a lack of procedural legitimacy — Whether filing of the Memorandum of Appearance a step in the proceedings — Whether parties estopped from referring dispute to arbitration under Arbitration Act 2005 s 10(1)(a) 1 case
Key Statutes
Arbitration Act 2005 (Cap 646)
cited in 68 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 28 cases Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
cited in 10 cases Arbitration Act
cited in 9 cases Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
cited in 8 cases National Land Code (Cap 828)
cited in 5 cases Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 5 cases Interpretation Act
cited in 5 cases UK Arbitration Act 1996
cited in 4 cases English Arbitration Act 1996
cited in 3 cases Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
cited in 3 cases Contracts Act
cited in 3 cases Federal Constitution
cited in 3 cases Arbitration Act 1996
cited in 2 cases UK Arbitration Act
cited in 2 cases Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Azlan bin Sulaiman 14 Rajes Raghavji 11 Nadzarin bin Wok Nordin 10 Wan Ahmad Farid bin Wan Salleh 9 Muhammad Adam bin Abdullah 8 Azimah binti Omar 7 Mariana binti Haji Yahya 7 Mohd Arief Emran bin Arifin 7 Utama Wan Ahmad Farid bin Wan Salleh 6 Muhammad Adam @ Edward bin Abdullah 6 Aliza binti Sulaiman 6 Nallini Pathmanathan 5 Ong Chee Kwan 5 Wong Kian Kheong 5 Azahar bin Mohamed 5
Top Firms
Sanjay Mohan 5 Moideen & Max 4 Mohanadass Partnership 4 Amar Syiimir Izzat & Sham 4 Rahmat Lim & Partners 4 Zul Rafique & Partners 3 Baskaran 3 Cheah Teh & Su 2 C.S. Tan Seah & Partners 2 Rosli Dahlan Saravana Partnership 2 Rajashree 2 The Law Office of Anil & Tan 2 Lo Chambers 2 Lim Chee Wee Partnership 2 Dason Raj & Partners 2
Top Lawyers
Mohanadass Kanagasabai 5 Thomas Shaun Mathews 5 Siew Suet Mey 4 Faisal Moideen 3 Kalashini Sandrasegaran 3 Sanjay Mohan 3 Ng Faye Xiang 3 Mohd Shahrysham 3 Fatin Adriana 3 Steven Seah Shu Keen 2 Rajashree Suppiah 2 Amira Nur Nadia binti Azhar 2 Kuan Kai Tat 2 Anilraj A/L Verdamanickam 2 Tay Por Hai 2
How many Arbitration cases are reported in Malaysia courts?
127 reported Malaysia judgments (2017–2026) involve Arbitration.
When will the courts stay litigation in favour of arbitration?
The judgments apply the mandatory stay under section 10 of the Arbitration Act 2005 and Article 8 of the Model Law where the dispute falls within a valid arbitration clause. Where a debt subject to arbitration is met by a winding-up petition, the courts consider a Fortuna injunction and the threshold for a stay or dismissal.
How are foreign arbitral awards enforced?
The collection addresses the recognition and enforcement of a foreign award registered in the seat court under the New York Convention, and the limited grounds on which enforcement may be resisted or the award set aside under the Arbitration Act 2005.
What is the courts' overall role in arbitration?
The judgments describe a supportive but limited role: giving effect to the parties' choice of arbitration with minimal curial interference, staying inconsistent litigation, and enforcing awards, while retaining the narrow supervisory jurisdiction the Act preserves.
Cases
Page 1 of 6w-02ca-1212-07-2024
BELLWORTH DEVELOPMENTS SDN BHD v SETIAKON BUILDERS SDN BHD
14 June 2026
MYCOA
ma-22c-1-01-2026
Webest Sdn Bhd v Arkitek AAP
28 May 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-48-11-2025
AMPROJEK CONSTRUCTION SDN. BHD. v MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN. BHD.
13 May 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-52-11-2025
MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN. BHD. v AMPROJEK CONSTRUCTION SDN. BHD.
13 May 2026
MYHC
ca-24c-1-04-2026
1. ) AHMAD ZAKI RESOURCES BERHAD 2. ) AHMAD ZAKI SDN BHD v KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
6 May 2026
MYHC
wa-24ncc-57-01-2026
KAYANGAN KEMAS SDN BHD v 1. ) EXYTE MALAYSIA SDN BHD 2. ) AMBANK (M) BERHAD
26 April 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-53-11-2025
MAYFAIR VENTURES SDN BHD v SETIAKON BUILDERS SDN BHD
21 April 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-55-12-2025
SETIAKON BUILDERS SDN BHD v MAYFAIR VENTURES SDN BHD
21 April 2026
MYHC
wa-24ncvc-6302-12-2025
1. ) P. Ratnavali Devi A/P S Mudaliar 2. ) ABD RAHMAN BIN BAHARI 3. ) ABU BAKAR BIN ABU HANIPAH 4. ) AINAA SHAFEENAZ BINTI SHAMSUDDIN 5. ) ALVIN OH SEONG YEW 6. ) ANDREW FONG CHUN HENG 7. ) ANDREW FRANCIS A/L SAVARINATHAN 8. ) ANJALEE DEVI A/P PENUMAL 9. ) ATIKAH BINTI AHMAD 10. ) AZMAN BIN ABDULLAH 11. ) BALAKRISHNAN A/L V VELLASAMY 12. ) CHAN BEE CHIN 13. ) CHAN LIAN SEE 14. ) CHAN WAI SAN 15. ) CHE WAN PUTEH @ ADNAAN BIN C.W. SULAIMAN 16. ) CHEAH WOAN CHYN 17. ) CHEAH YOOK YUEN 18. ) CHEON...
14 April 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-50-11-2025
DIAN KIARA SDN. BHD. v GCH RETAIL (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD.
12 April 2026
MYHC
wa-24c-188-12-2025
1. ) TRANSGRID VENTURES SDN BHD 2. ) BWS ENGINEERING SDN BHD v MALAYSIA LNG SDN BHD
7 April 2026
MYHC
bl-22ncc-26-12-2025
KUAN KEE HONG v KONG KWAI FEI
17 March 2026
MYHC
cb-21c-1-08-2025
Kerajaan Malaysia v MAJU JAYA PASARANA SDN BHD
11 March 2026
MYHC
wa-24c-16-02-2026
CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (M) SDN BHD v SYNARGYM SDN BHD
8 March 2026
MYHC
wa-22ncvc-222-04-2024
RIO DE GIBBRAELLO PTE LTD v 1. ) TETUAN HARJIT SANDHU, WAN & ASSOCIATES 2. ) HARJIT SINGH SANDHU 3. ) PRAMJIT SINGH A/L RAGHBIR SINGH
4 March 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-39-10-2025
VITAL TALENT SDN BHD v KIARAFIELD SDN BHD
3 March 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-42-10-2025
KIARAFIELD SDN. BHD. v VITAL TALENT SDN. BHD.
3 March 2026
MYHC
wa-24c-178-10-2025
ONE AMERIN RESIDENCE SDN BHD v RAGAWANG CORPORATION SDN BHD
2 March 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-40-06-2024
HIFORM (M) SDN. BHD. (DALAM LIKUIDASI) v TSR BINA SDN BHD
1 March 2026
MYHC
ba-22ncvc-285-07-2025
PEAK MODEL SDN. BHD. v 1. ) HATI JANAKUASA SDN. BHD. 2. ) GONG WEI 3. ) LIU JIANGLIN
12 February 2026
MYHC
ba-22c-31-11-2025
KEG SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) v IKANO JOHOR JAYA SDN BHD
5 February 2026
MYHC
cb-24ncvc-128-06-2025
PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN PERTANIAN NEGERI PAHANG v NADA RIMBA SDN BHD
29 January 2026
MYHC
cb-24ncvc-202-08-2025
Perbadanan Kemajuan Pertanian Negeri Pahang (PKPP) v NADA RIMBA SDN BHD
29 January 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-35-08-2025
GSIB SDN BHD v MRCB SENTRAL PROPERTIES SDN BHD
29 January 2026
MYHC
wa-24carb-44-10-2025
MRCB Sentral Properties Sdn Bhd v GSIB Sdn Bhd
29 January 2026
MYHC