YASAK BIN IBRAHIM 1. ) PEJABAT TANAH DAN GALIAN PULAU PINANG 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang

YASAK BIN IBRAHIM 1. ) PEJABAT TANAH DAN GALIAN PULAU PINANG 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang

The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court: the plaintiff's cause of action accrued long before the 2019 writ, contemporaneous documents show knowledge and acceptance of compensation, and the claim is therefore time-barred under s2 Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 (36-month limit); consequently the striking out under Order 18 r19 was appropriate and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
P-01(IM)(NCvC)-638-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Yasak bin Ibrahim (bertindak sebagai Pemegang Kuasa kepada pewaris-pewaris si mati Shuaib @ Shuib bin Hussain); 1st Respondent / Defendant: Pejabat Tanah dan Galian Pulau Pinang; 2nd Respondent / Defendant: Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 April 2024
Case Number
P-01(IM)(NCvC)-638-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Decision on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Claim Under Order 18 R19 (strike Out)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Limitation / Statute of Limitations, Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 S2, Strike Out / Frivolous Vexatious Abuse of Process, Locus Standi, Form E Defects
Source Language
Malay/English

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yasak bin Ibrahim (bertindak sebagai Pemegang Kuasa kepada pewaris-pewaris si mati Shuaib @ Shuib bin Hussain)

Appellant / Plaintiff

Pejabat Tanah dan Galian Pulau Pinang

1st Respondent / Defendant

Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang

2nd Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Decision on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Claim Under Order 18 R19 (strike Out)

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim challenging compulsory acquisition is time-barred under the Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 s2
  2. 2 Whether contemporaneous documentary evidence defeats the plaintiff's affidavit allegations about a defective Form E
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff had locus standi to bring the action as constituted

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court: the plaintiff's cause of action accrued long before the 2019 writ, contemporaneous documents show knowledge and acceptance of compensation, and the claim is therefore time-barred under s2 Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 (36-month limit); consequently the striking out under Order 18 r19 was appropriate and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Respondents awarded costs of RM10,000.00 (no alokatur)