SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 MarsdenLR 2042

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ONG HOCK TEK – Appellant
Versus
DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR & ANOR – Respondent
[Judicial Review Application No: WA-25-222-05/2024]



Petitioner Advocates:Phoebe Loi Yean Wei,See Hau Tsien ,Respondent Advocate: Gayathri Chandrakasan

Judicial review applicants must present special circumstances for a stay, emphasizing the balance of convenience and potential irreparable harm.

Headnote:(A) Rules of Court 2012 - Order 53 Rule 3 - Application for Judicial Review - Stay of development order granted to developers for land classified as reserve land for power lines and transmission - Requirement for special circumstances for stay articulated - The Applicant demonstrated evidence of potential irreparable harm to property and environmental risks due to proposed development. (Paras 10.1, 10.2, 13, 15, 16)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, the registered proprietor of adjacent land to the impugned land, sought to quash R1's decision to grant a development order to R2 for construction on reserve land, claiming the order contravenes statutory plans. R2 undertook earthworks that allegedly caused soil erosion and flooding, impacting the applicants’ property. (Paras 6.1 - 6.6)

Findings of Court:
The court found the applicant established special circumstances demonstrating potential irreparable harm and concluded that the balance of convenience favored granting the stay of the impugned decision pending trial. (Paras 15, 16)

Issues: Whether the applicant claims sufficient grounds for a stay of the development order pending judicial review of its legality. (Paras 14, 15)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the grants of stay require a demonstration of special circumstances, which the applicant provided through evidence of potential harm and infringement of statutory plans, noting the importance of maintaining the status quo pending adjudication. (Paras 10.1, 15)

Result: Application for stay of decision allowed; costs in the cause.

Table of Content
1. judicial review application and development order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz J:

(Lampiran 1 - Penggantungan)

Introduction

[1] The Applicant is seeking a stay of the decision made by the First Respondent (R1: DBKL) in granting a development order to Kaisar Maxim Sdn Bhd (R2: Kaisar Maxim) for a proposed development on a piece of land classified as reserve land for power lines and electricity transmission.

[2] The Applicant was granted leave to apply for Judicial Review (JR) under O 53 r 3 of the Rules of Court 2012 (RC 2012) on 15 July 2024:

(1) For ease of reference, I reproduced the said application (L.1) as follows:

1. That leave be granted to the Applicant pursuant to O 53 r 3 of the Rules of Court 2012 to commence judicial review proceedings for:-

An order of Certiorari to quash the R1 's decision to grant a purported development order/approval for the following proposed development on Lot PT 9419 (later alienated as PT 50106), Mukim Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur (the "Impugned Decision"):

'CADANGAN PEMBANGUNAN 5 BLOK PANGSAPURI 32 TINGKAT DAN 34 TINGKAT DAN TINGKAT BAWAH ARAS JALAN UNTUK TEMPAT LETAK KERETA YANG MENGANDUNGI:

A. FASA 1

3 BLOK PANGSAPURI (620 UNIT) 32 TINGKAT TERMASUK 3 TINGKAT PODIUM DAN 6 TINGKAT BAWAH ARAS JALAN UNTUK TEMPAT LETAK KERETA BESERTA 1 UNIT TNB,

BLOK A: 214 UNIT (29 TINGKAT TERMASUK 2 TINGKAT RUANG KEMUDAHAN).

BLOK B: 214 UNIT (29 TINGKAT TERMASUK 2 TINGKAT RUANG KEMUDAHAN).

BLOK C: 192 UNIT (30 TINGKAT TERMASUK 2 TINGKAT RUANG KEMUDAHAN).

B. FASA 2

2 BLOK PANGSAPURI (428 UNIT) 34 TINGKAT TERMASUK 5 TINGKAT PODIUM DAN 2 TINGKATBAWAH ARAS JALAN UNTUK TEMPATLETAK KERETA BESERTA 1 UNIT TNB.

BLOK D: 241 UNIT (29 TINGKAT TERMASUK 2 TINGKAT RUANG KEMUDAHAN).

BLOK E: 214 UNIT (29 TINGKAT TERMASUK 2 TINGKAT RUANG KEMUDAHAN).

DIATAS LOT PT 9419, MUKIM KUALA LUMPUR UNTUK TETUAN KAISAR MAXIM SDN BHD '.

2. An order for the Impugned Decision and all other processes relating to the same be stayed pending the full and final disposal of this judicial review application.

3. That the Applicant be permitted to file further affidavits as the Applicant considers necessary for the substantive judicial review proceedings herein.

4. Costs of and incidental to this application to be costs in the cause; and

5. Any further and/or other order that this Honourable Court deems fit and/or otherwise appropriate."

[3] The application before this Court today:

(1) Pertains only to para 2 (highlighted above), where the applicant is seeking an order to stay the Impugned Decision and all related processes pending the full and final disposal of this judicial review application.

(2) It is to be noted that this Court had granted an Interim Stay Order until 30 July 2024, pending the disposal of this JR application.

(3) Both DBKL and Kaisar Maxim, contested the stay application (L1), arguing that the application has no merits and should be dismissed with costs.

[4] I heard this stay application on 17 June 2025. After reviewing the cause papers filed, the respective written submissions of the parties, and hearing both counsels, I find that this application has merit and is allowed with costs in the cause.

[5] Dissatisfied with the decision:

(1) R2: Kaiser Maxim filed a notice of appeal on 18 June 2025.

(2) R1: DBKL filed a notice of appeal on 20 June 2025.

Since both appeals concerned the same decision, I will only prepare a single ground of judgment. My reasons are as follows:

Brief Facts

[6] The brief facts are as follows:

6.1 The Applicant is the registered proprietor of a piece of land known as Lot 8349, Mukim Kuala Lumpur, which is located at No. 2A, Jalan 2/109, Off Jalan Desa Utama, Taman Desa, 58100 Kuala Lumpur, and an adjacent land adjoining the impugned land, located directly above the slopes of the latter.

6.2 DBKL (R1) granted a development order and/or has given approval to Kaisar Maxim (R2) for a proposed development (the "Impugned Decision") on Lot PT 9419 (later alienated as PT 50106), Mukim Kuala Lump

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top