5 Mar 2025
1. ) Tan Lai Whatt Sebastian 2. ) Yau Wai Kin 3. ) MRS KOH BEE GEOK NEE TAN 4. ) HENG CHO KHEE 5. ) HOWE SOO LIAN 6. ) Lee Yong Yeow 7. ) Audrey Teoh Jo Ann 8. ) Phua Kie Hwee 9. ) ALBERT LEONG KUM HOONG 10. ) WONG YUN HAR MIRANDA 11. ) WON
- Citation
- BA-22NCvC-219-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Court
- High Court
- Case number
- BA-22NCvC-219-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
The challenge to the 48-month completion period is time-barred because a cause of action attacking valid contractual clauses accrued on execution of the SPAs per Obata-Ambak; therefore LAD based solely on the 36→48 month difference cannot be recovered unless delay extends beyond the valid 48 months. However, the legality and effect of the Controller's wholesale exemption for the Private Lease Scheme raise substantial questions of law (potential conflict with HDA, NLC, STA, SMA and Loh Tina precedent) that cannot be resolved on a striking out application and require trial (or a contested O14A)…