The expositions on the above quoted provisions of the law can be found in ASM Development (KL) Sdn Bhd v Econpile (M) Sdn Bhd [2022] 6 MLJ 392 (Court of Appeal), where His Lordship Mohd Nazlan JCA specifically spelled out that there are 3 separate circumstances where an adjudication decision ceases to be binding:- adjudication decision is binding unless firstly, it is set aside by the High Court on any of the grounds referred to in s 15; secondly, the subject matter of the decision is settled by a written agreement between the parties; or thirdly, the dispute is finally decided by arbitration or the case law authorities have held, produces merely an ntil final resolution in one of two other dispute resolution mechanisms ordinarily construed as CIPAA on the enforcement of adjudication decision as a judgment merely afforded an order of the court to enforce the adjudication decision as if it was a judgment or order of the High Court, and that authorities in respect of an adjudication decision upon which a statutory demand under s 466(1) of the Companies Act 2016 was based, did not decide that the debt created was not disputable even if ordered to be enforced as if it was a judgment or order of the High entered as a judgment or deemed equal to a judgment of the High Court, it was not indisputable like a bears the character of interim finality albeit being immediately binding and enforceable at the same time although an adjudication decision only yields interim finality, the effect of an adjudication decision is that the