Abstract:
Non-payment issues have plagued the Malaysian construction industry for decades. To remedy non-payment, unpaid contractors can choose to mediate, adjudicate, arbitrate, or suspend works contractually. In spite of this convenience, previous studies have shown that the contractors in Malaysia do not favor this right in remedying non-payment, and similarly there is almost no case law to further illustrate the adversities in exercising this right. Previous study revealed that suspension of work was less favored. Until today, there is no study to explain the underlying reasons for this disinclination. Since there are no direct cases that deal with the proposition, the discussion of the issues in this paper is by way of indirect cases which are related to the problems that may arise when contractor suspends works. By using available case laws and reference to two Malaysian standard forms of contract such as CIDB 2000 and PAM 2006, this study postulates that possible perceived risks, obligations, and uncertainties are the antecedents of contractors’ intention to suspend works against non-payment. Accordingly, the findings shed a light to the practitioners about the do’s and don'ts in suspension of work. Optimistically, it offers premises for elevating these inhibitors, and thus increases the adoption of this clause with future interventions.
