PJD REGENCY SDN BHD v. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH & ANOR AND OTHER APPEALS

[2021] 1 MLRA 506

PJD REGENCY SDN BHD v. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH & ANOR AND OTHER APPEALS
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat CJ, Nallini Pathmanathan, Abdul Rahman Sebli, Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJJ
[Case Nos: 01(f)-29-10-2019(W), 01(f)-30-10-2019(W), 01(i)-40-12-2019(M), 01(f)-41-12-2019(M), 01(f)-42-12-2019(M), 01(f)-4-02-2020(W) & 01(f)-31-10- 2020(W)]
19 January 2021

JUDGMENT

Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat CJ:

Introduction

[1] The phrase 'social legislation' attached to the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 ('HDA 1966') and its ensuing subsidiary legislation, ie the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 ('HDR 1989') is not merely a fanciful label. In disputes between home buyers and housing developers, its significance lies in the approach taken by the courts to tip the scales of justice in favour of the home buyers given the disparity in bargaining power between them and the housing developers.

[2] The question then arises: what happens when the developers devise ingenious schemes to circumvent the law and when they are called out for it, turn around to say that it is the home buyers who seek to make a windfall under the guise of 'protection'? To our minds, this is the crux of these appeals.

Background Facts

[3] There are seven appeals before us comprising three sets of different cases. All cases stemmed from applications for judicial review filed in the High Court at Kuala Lumpur and Malacca.

[4] Two appeals (Appeals No 29 and No 30) were filed by PJD Regency Sdn Bhd, the developer of a project known as 'You Vista' in Cheras. The 1st respondent in both appeals is the statutory housing tribunal ('Housing Tribunal') constituted under s 16B of the HDA 1966. The 2nd respondent in both appeals are the purchasers of certain units in that development project. We will refer to this set of appeals as 'PJD Regency Cases'.

[5] Three appeals (Appeals No 40, 41 and 42) were filed by the purchasers of a project known as 'Taman Paya Rumput Perdana Fasa 2'. The common respondent is the developer of the project, GJH Avenue Sdn Bhd. This set of appeals will be referred to collectively as 'GHJ Avenue Cases'.

Sign up to view full cases Login