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

2022 MarsdenLR 1547

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
YII SING CHIU – Appellant
Versus
AIKBEE TIMBERS SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: WA-24NCvC-2452-12/2020]



Petitioner Advocates:Viola De Cruz ,Respondent Advocate: Wong Zhi Khuna,M/s Michael Chow

Maintenance charges must be uniform among similar property types, as established by relevant statutory provisions in the strata management context.

Headnote:(A) Strata Management Act 2013 – Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Act 1966 – Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Regulations 1989 – Maintenance charges and contributions to sinking funds – Developer imposed different rates unlawfully between apartment parcels and commercial parcels from 21 April 2016 to 31 March 2019 – Management Corporation continued unlawful rates – Declarations of illegality granted for maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions. (Paras 3, 4, 30, 34, 45)

Facts of the case: Applicant challenged the legality of differing maintenance charges and contributions to the sinking fund imposed by the developer and the Management Corporation on different property parcels of Pearl Suria development.

Findings of Court: The rates imposed by both the developer and Management Corporation were found to be unlawful, null, and void; the same rate must apply to all parcels.

Issues: Key issues involved the legality and interpretation of maintenance charge structures under the SMA and applicable regulations, focusing on whether differing rates amidst different types of parcels were valid.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court affirmed that maintenance charges must be uniform for similar parcels, consistent with statutory provisions intended to protect the interests of owners and ensure equity.

Result: Declarations of illegality granted regarding varying maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions.

JUDGMENT

Amarjeet Singh Serjit Singh J:

Introduction

[1] In the instant originating summons the applicant, one of the proprietors of a serviced apartment parcel ("apartment parcels") in an integrated/mixed development project that consist of a retail complex/shopping mall and car park ("commercial parcels") identified as Pearl Suria - Menara Pearl Point 2 ("Pearl Suria") sought the determination of this Court as to the validity of the different rates of maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund imposed on apartment parcels and commercial parcels.

[2] The questions for determination sought were framed as follows:

(i) whether on the true construction of the provisions of the Strata Management Act 2013 (" SMA "), the Strata Titles Act 1985 ("STA"), the Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Act 1966, the Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Regulations 1989, in particular, Schedule H as prescribed in reg 11:

(a) the determination of and imposition of the different rates of maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund between apartment parcels and commercial parcels by the 1st respondent as the developer of Pearl Suria is valid in law; and

(b) the determination of different rates of the maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund by the 3rd respondent as the management corporation ("MC") of Pearl Suria is valid in law?

[3] On 23 June 2022, I allowed the originating summons by answering both questions in the negative and made the following declarations which can be summarised as follows:

(i) a declaration that the difference of the maintenance charges and the contribution to the sinking fund imposed by the 1st respondent on apartment parcels on one hand and commercial parcels on the other hand from the date of vacant possession (21 April 2016) to one month from the date of the 1st Annual General Meeting ("1st AGM") held by the MC (25 February 2019) was illegal, null and void;

(ii) a declaration that the difference of the maintenance charges and the contribution to the sinking fund maintained by the MC on apartment parcels on one hand and commercial parcels on the other hand from the date the MC took over the function from the 1st respondent (26 February 2019) to the date before an amendment to the rates were to take effect (31 March 2019) was illegal, null and void;

(iii) a declaration that the difference of the maintenance charges and the contribution to the sinking fund imposed by the MC on apartment parcels on one hand and commercial parcels on the other hand from 1 April 2019 to the present date is illegal, null and void; and

(iv) a declaration that the maintenance charges and the contribution to the sinking fund must be the same for all parcels, that is to say, RM2.22 and RM0.30 per share unit respectively.

[4] Based on the above declarations that were granted the following consequential orders were accordingly made:

(a) the 1st respondent as proprietor of the retail complex/shopping mall is to pay to the MC maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund at the rate of RM2.22 and RM0.30 per share unit respectively from 21 April 2016 to 25 February 2019;

(b) the 1st respondent, as proprietor of the car park (whole floor parcel), to pay to the MC maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund at the rate of RM2.22 per share unit and RM0.30 per share unit respectively for the period from 21 April 2016 to the date of the sale of the car park (whole floor parcel) to the 2nd respondent;

(c) the 2nd respondent as proprietor of the car park (whole floor parcel), is to pay the MC maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund at the rate of RM2.22 per share unit and RM0.30 per share unit respectively from the date of purchase of the car park (whole floor parcel) from the 1st respondent to 25 February 2019;

(d) the 1st and 2nd respondents are to pay to the MC maintenance charges and contribution to the sinking fund at the rate of RM2.22 per share unit and RM0.30 per share unit


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