DAMAI CITY Sdn Bhd

On the court record

A company litigating the setting aside, stay and enforcement of a CIPAA adjudication decision on natural-justice grounds, alongside the underlying money claim tested for a triable issue on summary judgment.

Damai City Sdn Bhd appears in the corpus in construction-payment litigation under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012, in the recurring posture of a party seeking to set aside, stay or resist the enforcement of an adjudication decision. It appears as respondent, applicant and defendant in the High Court.

The central subject is a contested adjudication decision and the natural-justice challenge to it. The company was involved in applications concerning the setting aside, stay and enforcement of adjudication decisions, where the principal ground was an alleged breach of natural justice — whether the adjudicator had denied a party the opportunity to respond to issues said to have been raised. In one connected matter the company applied, in an originating summons, under Order 69A rules 2, 3 and 7 and Order 92 rule 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 together with section 15(b) and (d) of CIPAA, engaging the court's supervisory jurisdiction over the adjudicator's decision.

The company also litigated the underlying commercial claim on summary judgment. In a matter under Order 14 rule 1 of the Rules of Court 2012, the court restated the settled principles governing summary judgment — that it is not enough for a defendant to make bare allegations or a general denial and swear that it owes the claimant nothing, because the burden of showing a triable issue rests on the defendant. That pairing — an adjudication fought on natural-justice grounds and the money claim tested for a triable issue on summary judgment — is characteristic of construction litigation, where a claimant pursues both the swift statutory remedy and the ordinary court process, and the paying party resists on both fronts. The company's footprint is therefore a focused study in how the CIPAA adjudication regime and the summary-judgment jurisdiction operate side by side in a disputed construction payment.