Martego Sdn Bhd v Arkitek Meor & Chew Sdn Bhd and Another Appeal  8 CLJ 433
In the most recent development, the Federal Court found that even after the Contract is terminated, an Unpaid Party / Claimant may still launch a CIPAA Claim to recover the outstanding sum.
Further, the Federal Court confirmed that an Unpaid Party / Claimant may also launch a CIPAA Claim to recover outstanding sum arising out of Final Payment / Final Account.
This is a case where the Developer of the Project terminated the Project Architect’s service. Subsequently, there was a payment dispute between the parties as to the amount of professional fees and the Architect mounted a CIPAA claim to recover its professional fees.
The Adjudication Decision was rendered in favour of the Architect.
Being dissatisfied with the Adjudication Decision, the Developer raised jurisdictional challenges against the Adjudication Decision and sought to set aside the Adjudication Decision in the court on the basis that the Adjudicator had acted beyond jurisdiction to make determination on terminated contract and CIPAA does not apply to final payment as CIPAA was enacted to cure the mischief of timely payment for work related to progress payment and not final accounts.
Federal Court Decision:
The Federal Court dismissed the Developer’s challenge and ruled that:
- CIPAA claim can be based on a terminated construction contract;
- CIPAA claim is not confined to interim claims only and CIPAA claim can be based upon final claim.