top of page

13 HOMEBUYERS WIN RM610K IN LAD CLAIM AGAINST DEVELOPER

By:


Bryan Lui (Co-Managing Partner) [bryanlui@luibhullar.com]

Harneshpal Karamjit Singh (Co-Managing Partner) [harnesh@luibhullar.com]


The Purchasers entered into Sale and Purchase Agreements (SPAs) with the Developer, of the housing project called "Tropicana Metropark Phase 1C."


Before signing the SPAs, the Purchasers had to pay a booking fee/deposit to the appellant or the appellant's stakeholder solicitors. The SPAs were modified by the Developer, extending the delivery of vacant possession and completion of common facilities from the standard 36 months to 45 months.


The sessions court judge granted the Purchaser's application to dispose the case on the points of law and awarded them costs on October 21, 2022.


On 1 March 2023 the High Court upheld the Sessions Court's decision and dismissed the Developer's appeal with costs.


The High Court upheld the decision made by the Sessions Court regarding this legal issue. The Federal Court's ruling in the case of Ang Ming Lee & Ors v. Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor dan other appeals [2020] 1 CLJ 162; [2020] 1 MLJ 281 states that any modification or alteration of provisions in Schedule H (the statutory sale and purchase agreement) approved by the Controller of Housing under Regulation 11(3) of the Regulation is beyond the scope of authority granted by the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966.


This ruling is also supported by the Federal Court's decision in the PJD Regency case, as well as the Court of Appeal's decisions in Vinesh Naidu v. Prema Bonanza Sdn Bhd [2023] 1 LNS 162 and UE E&C Sanjia (M) Sdn Bhd v. Lee Jeng Yuh & Anor [2021] 10 CLJ 271; [2021] 6 MLJ 864.


Messrs Lui & Bhullar represented 13 purchasers in the said action.

11,617 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page