Premium Park Development Sdn Bhd Rightbase Trading Sdn. Bhd

Premium Park Development Sdn Bhd Rightbase Trading Sdn. Bhd

The Court held that the Learned JC was correct that the tenancy had been terminated and plaintiff could not recover rent; however the Learned JC erred in treating issuance of Form K as sufficient to vest title — vesting occurs upon memorial under ss 23 and 66 — so plaintiff retained proprietary interest until memorialisation but the consent order granted defendant access until formal acquisition and therefore plaintiff could not succeed on trespass claims over the Access Road or Unidentifiable Land; Appeal 313 dismissed and Appeal 373 allowed, setting aside the High Court's finding of trespass over the Access Road.

Citation
J-02(NCvC)(W)-313-02/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Plaintiff: Premium Park Development Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Right Base Trading Sdn Bhd
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 October 2025
Case Number
J-02(NCvC)(W)-313-02/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Hearing and Judgment on Cross Appeals From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal 313 dismissed; Appeal 373 allowed; High Court order allowing trespass over Access Road set aside
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Trespass, Tenancy Agreement Termination, Vesting of Title, Statutory Interpretation, Consent Order Enforcement
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Administrative Law Compulsory Acquisition Trespass Tenancy Agreement Termination +3 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Premium Park Development Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Right Base Trading Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Hearing and Judgment on Cross Appeals From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff entitled to pursue rent under the tenancy agreement after compulsory acquisition commenced
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff retained proprietary interest and could claim trespass until issuance or memorialisation of Form K
  3. 3 Whether consent order in interlocutory proceeding precluded trespass claim over the Access Road

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Learned JC was correct that the tenancy had been terminated and plaintiff could not recover rent; however the Learned JC erred in treating issuance of Form K as sufficient to vest title — vesting occurs upon memorial under ss 23 and 66 — so plaintiff retained proprietary interest until memorialisation but the consent order granted defendant access until formal acquisition and therefore plaintiff could not succeed on trespass claims over the Access Road or Unidentifiable Land; Appeal 313 dismissed and Appeal 373 allowed, setting aside the High Court's finding of trespass over the Access Road.

Court Disposition

Appeal 313 dismissed; Appeal 373 allowed; High Court order allowing trespass over Access Road set aside

Orders

  • Appeal J-02(NCvC)(W)-313-02/2024 (Plaintiff) dismissed
  • Appeal J-02(NCvC)(W)-373-03/2024 (Defendant) allowed and Learned JC's finding of trespass over the Access Road set aside