Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 340 national land code 1965

Legal area

Court

3 Jul 2024

MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 1. ) Mohd Affandi Bin Ahmad 2. ) Aminah Binti Ahmad

Citation

02(f)-5-03/2024(J) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

02(f)-5-03/2024(J) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Appeal allowed. The Federal Court held that where a land is registered in the name of the purchaser and there is no notice or caveat, a subsequent purchaser/chargee who relied on the register and conducted ordinary due diligence is a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration under the proviso to s.340(3) NLC; the Court of Appeal erred in requiring banks to investigate underlying completed SPAs or to prove it was "impossible" to discover unlawfulness; negligence alone does not equal fraud and does not automatically negate bona fides under the Torrens system.
22 Sept 2022

PUJAAN PERTAMA SDN. BHD. 1. ) YAP LEE CHUAN 2. ) YAP LEE HWU 3. ) YAP LEE SENG

Citation

N-01(NCvC)(W)-408-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

N-01(NCvC)(W)-408-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Trial judge's finding that the Form 14A was forged was a plausible factual conclusion supported by solicitor's testimony and expert evidence; default by Fu Zhi Mao established fraud against it which binds other parties; appellant dealt directly with the fraudulent transferee and was therefore an immediate purchaser whose registered title is defeasible under s.340 NLC, so the appeal is dismissed and land must be re-registered to the plaintiffs.
22 Apr 2021

1. ) 1. See Leong Chye @ Sze Leong Chye 2. See Ewe Lin 2. ) United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Berhad 1. ) United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Berhad 2. ) 1. Kum Hoi Engineering Industries Sdn Bhd 2. Heveaplast Marketing Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

01(f)-5-02/2017(B) Didengar Bersama 02(f)-8-02/2017(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

01(f)-5-02/2017(B) Didengar Bersama 02(f)-8-02/2017(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The Federal Court held that on the established facts Heveaplast was the immediate purchaser and created the UOB charges after Heveaplast's registration; UOB therefore was a subsequent purchaser whose charge is protected by the proviso to s 340(3) of the National Land Code 1965 because there was no evidence UOB lacked good faith or valuable consideration. The Court of Appeal correctly implied a term into the UOB undertaking (business efficacy/officious bystander) that the undertaking only takes effect if the transfer enabling registration could occur; accordingly UOB's appeal and the See broth…

Malaysia Case Law

MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 1. ) Mohd Affandi Bin Ahmad 2. ) Aminah Binti Ahmad

PUJAAN PERTAMA SDN. BHD. 1. ) YAP LEE CHUAN 2. ) YAP LEE HWU 3. ) YAP LEE SENG

1. ) 1. See Leong Chye @ Sze Leong Chye 2. See Ewe Lin 2. ) United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Berhad 1. ) United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Berhad 2. ) 1. Kum Hoi Engineering Industries Sdn Bhd 2. Heveaplast Marketing Sdn. Bhd.