ING BANK N.V
About ING BANK N.V
ING BANK N.V appears in 3 reported Malaysia court cases (2025). ING BANK N.V is recorded as Respondent (2) and Appellant (1). These cases were heard before MYHC (2) and MYFC (1).
On the court record
Places a foreign bank at the centre of Malaysian jurisprudence on the recognition, enforcement and strictly limited review of foreign arbitral awards.
ING Bank N.V. appears in the reported judgments as a foreign financial institution litigating over the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award in Malaysia, with matters in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan). Named alongside a bunker-supply company, it stands on the award-holder side of a dispute that tested how a foreign award and a related foreign judgment are enforced under Malaysian law.
The Federal Court decision engaged questions of real significance to cross-border enforcement. It concerned the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award that had been registered in the seat court, and the interplay between the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, the UNCITRAL Model Law, the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1958 and the Arbitration Act 2005, together with Order 69 rule 9 of the Rules of Court 2012. The central question was whether the holder of a foreign confirmation judgment should proceed by the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act or under the arbitration legislation, and the extent to which a court may review such an award — whether by a de novo hearing or by minimal curial intervention — engaging the kompetenz-kompetenz doctrine and jurisdictional challenge in the court of the seat.
At the High Court level the related proceedings concerned an application under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005 to set aside a costs award, examining whether the statutory grounds under sections 37(1)(b)(ii), 37(2)(a)(i) or 37(2)(b) were established, whether the award conflicted with the public policy of Malaysia, and whether there had been a breach of natural justice or the right to be heard. A companion decision addressed the tribunal's jurisdiction and admissibility, res judicata and issue estoppel arising from a prior London arbitration, and the doctrine of minimal curial intervention. Together the decisions place the bank at the centre of Malaysian jurisprudence on the enforcement and limited review of foreign arbitral awards.
How many Malaysia court cases involve ING BANK N.V?
ING BANK N.V appears in 3 reported Malaysia court cases (2025).
Which courts does ING BANK N.V appear in?
ING BANK N.V appears before MYHC (2) and MYFC (1).
What cross-border enforcement question did the Federal Court consider?
Whether the holder of a foreign confirmation judgment on an arbitral award should enforce it under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1958 or under the arbitration legislation, and the extent of permissible court review — de novo hearing or minimal curial intervention — engaging the New York Convention, the UNCITRAL Model Law and the kompetenz-kompetenz doctrine.
On what basis was the costs award challenged at the High Court?
Under section 37 of the Arbitration Act 2005, examining whether the statutory grounds in sections 37(1)(b)(ii), 37(2)(a)(i) or 37(2)(b) were established, whether the award conflicted with the public policy of Malaysia, and whether there had been a breach of natural justice or the right to be heard.