MALAYAPINE ESTATES SDN B HD Chong Chee Hau

MALAYAPINE ESTATES SDN B HD Chong Chee Hau

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: the developer breached its duty of care and clause 13 of the SPA by failing to undertake proper and documented ground treatment on soft clay, resulting in consolidation settlement and recurring external defects; the plaintiffs' geotechnical expert (SP7) whose opinion was supported by site inspections and borehole investigations was preferred over the defendant's report; consequential remedial costs awarded by the Sessions Court were justified and the defendant's appeal is dismissed with costs RM5,000 per appeal.

Citation
BL-12BNCvC-7-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant (developer): Malayapine Estates Sdn Bhd; Respondents/plaintiffs (house Buyers): Yew Boon Chai & 16 Others
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 October 2023
Case Number
BL-12BNCvC-7-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (developer V House Buyers) / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care of Developer, Breach of Express and Implied Contractual Terms, Soil Subsidence and Ground Treatment, Expert Evidence and Weight, Defect Liability Period, Assessment of Quantum and Mitigation
Source Language
Malay/English
Construction Law Tort (negligence) Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Duty of Care of Developer Breach of Express and Implied Contractual Terms +4 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malayapine Estates Sdn Bhd

Appellant/defendant (developer)

Yew Boon Chai & 16 Others

Respondents/plaintiffs (house Buyers)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (developer V House Buyers) / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the developer owed and breached a duty of care to purchasers by failing to carry out proper ground treatment resulting in soil subsidence and external defects
  2. 2 Whether the defects amounted to breach of express and/or implied terms of the sale and purchase agreement (clause 13) to construct in a good and workmanlike manner
  3. 3 Whether expert evidence of plaintiffs (SP7) or defendant (SD1/SD2) should be preferred

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: the developer breached its duty of care and clause 13 of the SPA by failing to undertake proper and documented ground treatment on soft clay, resulting in consolidation settlement and recurring external defects; the plaintiffs' geotechnical expert (SP7) whose opinion was supported by site inspections and borehole investigations was preferred over the defendant's report; consequential remedial costs awarded by the Sessions Court were justified and the defendant's appeal is dismissed with costs RM5,000 per appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appeal dismissed with costs of RM5000.00 for every appeal