B.U. DEVELOPMENTS SDN BHD 1. ) ADELINE TAN KEAN SIM 2. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH

B.U. DEVELOPMENTS SDN BHD 1. ) ADELINE TAN KEAN SIM 2. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH

Applying PJD Regency and construing the contract to purchase, booking fee cheques and subsequent SPA as a single transaction, the court held that the initial date for computing LAD is the date the booking fee was given (14 February 2016); the booking fee is to be treated as paid on these facts despite non‑encashment, therefore the Tribunal and High Court correctly awarded LAD and their decisions are affirmed.

Citation
P-01(A)-440-08/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: B.U. Development Sdn Bhd; First Respondent (purchaser): Adeline Tan Kean Sim; Second Respondent (statutory Tribunal): Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 March 2025
Case Number
P-01(A)-440-08/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court Judicial Review of Tribunal Award / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judicial review decision and Tribunal award affirmed.
Legal Topics
Liquidated Ascertained Damages, Vacant Possession, Statutory Interpretation, Deemed Payment, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Pleading/concession
Source Language
Malay/English
Housing Law Contract Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Liquidated Ascertained Damages Vacant Possession Statutory Interpretation Deemed Payment +2 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B.U. Development Sdn Bhd

Appellant

Adeline Tan Kean Sim

First Respondent (purchaser)

Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah

Second Respondent (statutory Tribunal)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court Judicial Review of Tribunal Award / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period for calculating LAD begins from the date of payment of the booking fee or the date of the sale and purchase agreement (SPA)
  2. 2 Whether the booking fee is to be treated as paid (deemed payment) despite non‑encashment of cheques
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal and High Court erred in law or on fact in awarding LAD

Ratio Decidendi

Applying PJD Regency and construing the contract to purchase, booking fee cheques and subsequent SPA as a single transaction, the court held that the initial date for computing LAD is the date the booking fee was given (14 February 2016); the booking fee is to be treated as paid on these facts despite non‑encashment, therefore the Tribunal and High Court correctly awarded LAD and their decisions are affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judicial review decision and Tribunal award affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Tribunal award of RM50000.00 in favour of First Respondent for LAD upheld