Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Liquidated damages for late delivery

Legal area

Court

22 Apr 2025

Soon Chin Chye & 24 Lagi Sure Commerce Sdn Bhd

Citation

P-04(NCvC)(W)-51-02/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

P-04(NCvC)(W)-51-02/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that the Jazz Suites are housing accommodation within the meaning of the HDA 1966 notwithstanding commercial zoning; therefore SPA provisions inconsistent with the HDA Schedule H (including timing for delivery and computation of liquidated damages) are void and the correct date for computing liquidated damages is 36 months from the SPA signing with LAD payable until Certificate of Completion and Compliance dated 21 April 2017; clause 25 of the SPA is wide enough to preclude purchasers from indemnifying the developer for GST, and developer must refund GST collected; settlement a…
9 Sept 2024

IVORIA DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. NG SUAT CHENG

Citation

NA-12ANCvC-8-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-12ANCvC-8-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal is dismissed and the summary judgment below is affirmed because the plaintiff satisfied Order 14 requirements and the defendant failed to raise any triable issue: the SPA is a statutory contract under the HDA preserving the purchaser's right to liquidated damages; the contractual delivery date preceded the COVID‑19 exclusion period so s35 did not apply; the developer's claimed third‑party and operational difficulties do not excuse breach; and the purchaser has locus standi to sue.
15 Jul 2021

Abdul Rafit Bin Junus [No. K/P: 850702-12-6259] Tetuan Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis [didakwa sebagai firma guaman]

Citation

WA-12ANCvC-115-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCvC-115-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because the SPA (clause 30) expressly governed the stakeholder sum and conditions for release were unmet, the defect-liability period and certification requirements remained unfulfilled, there was no judgment against the developer to trigger release, and statutory provisions (s7A(7) and s22E HDA 1966) prohibit release that would defeat the statutory protective scheme — therefore the claim against the stakeholder disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was properly struck out under Order 18 r 19.
31 May 2020

KHOO SOON LEE REALTY SDN BHD (COMPANY NO: 66384-P) 1. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH Kementerian Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan 2. KEE WOEI CHONG [NRIC No.: 790416025113]

Citation

JA-25-15-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-25-15-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application allowed in part: Court held that "ready for connection" requires that electricity and water supply be available to be tapped into individual parcels such that vacant possession is effective only when purchasers can use utilities; late delivery damages are to be computed from scheduled delivery date until utilities are connected to each unit and must be calculated on the discounted purchase price; settlements/consent judgments are binding and preclude subsequent tribunal claims, and awards in respect of settled matters are quashed.
31 May 2020

KHOO SOON LEE REALTY SDN BHD (COMPANY NO: 66384-P) 1. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH Kementerian Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan 2. KAI SHEA LI [ NRIC No.: 900823015566 ] 3. LEE WOON KIEN [ NRIC No.: 880423015035 ]

Citation

JA-25-11-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-25-11-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application is allowed in part: the Court held that (1) "ready for connection" means supply must be available to be tapped into individual parcels such that switching on power or opening taps yields supply, therefore vacant possession is only effective when connections provide usable supply; (2) liquidated damages for late delivery must be calculated from the scheduled delivery date (36 months from SPA) until actual electricity and water connection to individual units; (3) the multiplicand for liquidated damages is the discounted price actually paid by the purchaser, not the pre-discount…
31 May 2020

KHOO SOON LEE REALTY SDN BHD (COMPANY NO: 66384-P) 1. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH Kementerian Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan 2. TAN CHEW LI [NRIC No.: 771119055400]

Citation

JA-25-12-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-25-12-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that 'ready for connection' and Clauses 26/35 must be read to require that effective vacant possession entitles a purchaser to actually draw electricity and water in the unit; therefore late delivery runs from scheduled delivery date until utilities are connected to each parcel; liquidated damages for late delivery must be calculated using the price actually paid by the purchaser (discounted price) as the multiplicand; and purchasers who have validly entered settlements/consent judgments cannot later pursue Tribunal claims — such Tribunal decisions are quashed insofar as they r…
SYARIKAT GUNUNG SEJAHTERA SDN BHD v. LIM SZE ON & ORS

Citation

SYARIKAT GUNUNG SEJAHTERA SDN BHD v. LIM SZE ON & ORS
Court

Malaysian court

Appellant was not a "housing developer" under the Act because it was not proprietor/vendor of the land nor did it sell the building lots; the building lots were alienated to respondents via Form 5A under the National Land Code making them registered owners; Schedule G (reg 11) applies to sale and purchase by a vendor/proprietor and not to the contractual arrangements here; the court cannot declare a party to be a licensed housing developer since licensing is the Controller's statutory function; therefore High Court declarations misapplied the Act and were set aside.
WONG THAI KUAI & ANOR V. KANSAS CORPORATION SDN BHD

Citation

WONG THAI KUAI & ANOR V. KANSAS CORPORATION SDN BHD
Court

Malaysian court

Petition dismissed: petitioners failed to identify the specific sub‑section of s218; the claimed debt was bona fide disputed and petitioners had not proved creditor status (set-off unavailable due to petitioners' own payment default); and in the exercise of the court's discretion, having regard to the wishes of the majority of creditors and public interest the court refused to wind-up and allowed the respondent to complete the development.
LEE POH CHOO v SEA HOUSING CORPORATION SB

Citation

LEE POH CHOO v SEA HOUSING CORPORATION SB
Court

Malaysian court

Res judicata did not apply because the first suit sought specific performance and damages limited to the period up to its filing; damages accruing after that filing date constitute a different cause of action and may be recovered in a subsequent suit. Plaintiff therefore entitled to damages for 16 June 1977 to 10 June 1982 and interest as awarded.