Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Development order

Legal area

Court

4 Jul 2025

TAN KOK SOON 1. ) BOO KUANG LOON 2. ) LEE EE HOE

Citation

WA-22NCvC-493-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-493-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the Letter of Undertaking and JVA required payment of the balance of the finder’s fee only upon signing of Sale and Purchase Agreements and that the JVA was mutually terminated before such sales occurred; the defendants fulfilled contractual obligation by paying the RM250,000 initial sum, there was no withholding of material documents to justify an adverse inference, and the plaintiff therefore failed to prove entitlement to further sums or appointment as project coordinator; claim dismissed with costs.
17 Jun 2025

ONG HOCK TEK DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR PENCELAH DICADANGKAN KAISAR MAXIM SDN. BHD

Citation

WA-25-222-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-222-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found that alleged illegality in granting the development order (possible contravention of KLSP 2020/KLCP 2020) and risk of irreversible changes to the land that would defeat effective relief constitute special circumstances; R2's bare averments of financial loss were unsubstantiated; balance of convenience and equity therefore favoured granting a stay of the impugned decision pending substantive determination of the judicial review; no undertaking for damages was required; stay allowed with costs in the cause.
17 Jun 2025

ONG HOCK TEK DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR PENCELAH DICADANGKAN KAISAR MAXIM SDN. BHD

Citation

WA-25-222-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-222-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found special circumstances established because the impugned development order allegedly contravenes the Kuala Lumpur statutory plans and allowing irreversible development would render the judicial review nugatory; R2's assertions of financial loss were bare averments unsupported by contemporaneous evidence; balance of convenience and equity favored preserving the status quo; accordingly a stay was granted pending substantive determination of the JR, with costs in the cause.
20 Feb 2025

1. ) Chin Tong Lim (menyaman atas kapasitinya sendiri dan sebagai pegawai awam Persatuan Penduduk Lake Fields, Sg Besi, untuk Meadows and Glades Residences, menurut Seksyen 9 Akta Pertubuhan, 1996 dan dalam kapasiti wakil bagi pemilik berda

Citation

WA-25-140-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-140-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The applicants failed to satisfy the requirements for specific discovery: they did not identify specific documents with requisite relevance or establish that documents sought were in respondents' possession; many relevant documents had already been produced; the request constituted a fishing expedition and was not necessary for the fair disposal of the judicial review. Court therefore refused to exercise its discretion to order specific discovery and dismissed the application with costs.
4 Oct 2024

TARGET TERM SDN. BHD. WALDORF AND WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

Citation

W-02(NCvC)(W)-1890-10/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

W-02(NCvC)(W)-1890-10/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that operating a commercial carpark business by licensing parking bays to customers constitutes licences, not tenancies, and thus does not amount to a prohibited 'dealing' under ss 34(2) and 69 STA 1985; accessory parcels that are expressly shown as such on a certified strata plan remain parcel property and do not convert into common property merely because not used in conjunction with the principal parcel; consequently the SPA was not illegal or void. Target Term is liable for back maintenance charges: for pre-1 June 2015 period at RM0.31/ft2 plus RM25 per carpark as developer…
7 Jun 2024

1. ) NORLIAH BINTI MOHAMAD 2. ) TAN KANG HOE 3. ) GEE BOON KEE 4. ) MAISARAH ALANNA BINTI MUHAMMED FIRUZ 5. ) DIANE CHRISTINA JESUDASAN 6. ) PARNAM SINGH A/L MEHAR SINGH 7. ) GOH DOH HAU 8. ) JAYANTHI A/P BOOBALAN 9. ) ZABA BIN HASRIN 10. )

Citation

BA-25-1-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-1-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was held to be academic and nugatory because the ad interim stay was varied by consent to allow permitted works and subsequently discontinued after inter parte hearing where the court found the original ex parte stay lacked full and frank disclosure (notably ownership of the land) and that applicants could not adequately compensate the developer; therefore no live controversy remained and the ad interim stay was properly discontinued.
7 Nov 2022

1. ) Dato Mohamad Yusof Bin A.Bakar 2. ) Lim Cheng Im 1. ) DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR 2. ) Lakaran Ceria Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-25-221-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-221-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court granted the discovery application because the JV Agreement exists and is likely in the possession or control of the respondents, the applicants satisfied the Yekambaran tri-partite test (document, relevance, possession), and the affidavits and surrounding facts raised reasonable grounds to believe there had been a breach of public duty/conflict of interest by the Datuk Bandar such that production of the JV Agreement was necessary to dispose fairly of the judicial review proceeding; accordingly the respondents were ordered to produce the JV Agreement and related documents or file aff…
8 Aug 2022

SUNRISE GREEN SDN BHD JABATAN KETUA PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN PERSEKUTUAN

Citation

W-01(W)-653-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

W-01(W)-653-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the injurious affection award must be confined to the damaged portion (Lot 487) because the adjoining lots remained physically intact, the loss of frontage affected only Lot 487, and an alternative access via Lot 490—approved by DBKL—meant the development was not landlocked; the appellant failed to prove otherwise and the trial judge's factual findings were not to be disturbed on appeal.
2 Sept 2021

EDDIE LOW (yang bertindak sebagai Pengerusi untuk BADAN KHAIRAT KEMATIAN PENDUDUK BANDAR WANGSA MAJU, SETAPAK, KUALA LUMPUR DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR

Citation

W-01(A)-750-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-750-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

DO 2014 lapsed by operation of statute, the appellant and its architect re-applied and gave undertakings evidencing knowledge and acquiescence to the prohibition, and the respondent lawfully exercised planning discretion in imposing Condition 6 taking residents' objections into account; therefore the High Court correctly dismissed the judicial review.
20 Apr 2021

1. ) DATO' MOHAMAD YUSOF BIN A. BAKAR 2. ) LIM CHENG IM 1. ) DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR 2. ) LAKARAN CERIA SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 931565-M)

Citation

WA-25-221-08-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-221-08-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Stay refused because the Development Order had already been validly issued and implemented; the 2nd Respondent had incurred substantial expenditure and would suffer irreparable harm; applicants were judicially estopped by prior unequivocal representations that development orders would remain valid; applicants failed to show serious triable issues or irreparable harm and did not act with requisite promptness; balance of convenience and public interest favoured refusal and applicants offered no undertaking as to damages.