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

2021 MarsdenLR 1030

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN ARA AMPANG – Appellant
Versus
PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH HULU LANGAT – Respondent
[Land Reference No: BA-15-210-10-2019]



The acquisition authority must compensate the management corporation for common property when strata units are compensated, in accordance with fair market value principles, preventing under-compensation or double counting.

Headnote:(A) Strata Titles Act 1985 – Sections 39(3), 42(1), 57 – Strata Management Act 2013 – Acquisition of common property – The court addressed whether the acquisition authority must compensate the management corporation for common property after compensating parcel owners for strata units. The court held that compensation is due for common property acquired in the same process as the strata units, reflecting principles of fair market value and avoiding under-compensation. (Paras 30, 31)

(B) Compensation Principles – The court emphasized that upon compensation for individual strata units, reasonable compensation for the management corporation regarding common property is obligatory, ensuring no double counting occurs. (Paras 30, 32)

Facts of the case: The case involves a management corporation's entitlement to compensation for common property in a strata development following land acquisition. The acquisition authority initially denied compensation for the common property. (Paras 2-4)

Findings of Court: The management corporation is entitled to fair compensation for common property, specifically for car parking bays, while no additional compensation is owed for vacant land. (Paras 44, 45)

Issues: The main issues were the rights of the management corporation concerning compensation for common property following the acquisition of strata parcels, and whether the principles of adequate compensation apply. (Paras 2-3)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found the position of the Land Administrator illogical and inconsistent with fair market value principles, thus ruling that compensation for common property must be based on its value independent of parcels' compensation. (Paras 30-31)

Result: The Land Administrator's compensation award was increased by RM685,040, with interest payable from the date of the compensation order. (Paras 44, 46)

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The management corporation is a separate legal entity from parcel owners and is entitled to compensation for common property acquired in the same process as strata units (!) (!) . - Compensation must reflect fair market value and adhere to the principles of "adequate compensation" under the law (!) (!) . - No compensation is payable for vacant land or open space that does not generate income, but compensation is due for income-earning car parking bays (!) (!) . - Compensation for common property must be based on its specific use and potential income, avoiding double counting with parcel unit valuations (!) (!) . - The assessment of compensation should consider the nature of the property, its income potential, and relevant valuation standards (!) (!) .

What is the entitlement of a management corporation to compensation for common property when strata units are acquired?

How should compensation for common property be determined under land acquisition laws?

Are there circumstances where compensation for common property is not required upon land acquisition?


DECISION

Tee Geok Hock JC:

Introduction

[1] This Land Reference involves a very important question of law of wide implications to property owners and management corporations of strata developments in Malaysia.

[2] The question of law is whether, after having compensated the parcel owners of strata units for the market values of their respective strata units, the acquisition authority can acquire the common property in the same strata development in the same acquisition process without paying any value to the management corportion of the strata development.

[3] In our present land reference, the Land Aministrator has taken the position that the management corporation in such land acquisition scenario should not get any monetary compensation whatsoever for the common property in the strata development, whereas the Appellant (management corporation) has taken the position that it is entitled to a reasonable compensation for the common property in the strata development which has been acquired in the same process as the acquisition of the strata units in the same development.

[4] When this matter first came up for hearing and decision previously, this Court directed the parties to do further legal research and file and exchange supplementary submissions on this important question of law which, according to the understanding of this Court based on both counsel's feedback, has still not been covered by any reported judgment of the Court in Malaysia on this question of law.

Background

[5] A brief summary of the subject land and the land acquisition are as follows:

2.1 Subject Land:

Title No GM472 Lot 43171 s 14 Bandar Ampang Daerah Hulu Langat, Selangor.

2.2 Gazette No/Date: 2081/23 July 2015

2.3 Date of service of Borang E: 21 August 2015

2.4 Date/Area (Borang G): 18 October 2016/3895 M2 (41,926 sq ft)

2.5 Date/Area (Borang H): 18 October 2016/3895 M2 (41,926 sq ft)

2.6 Project: Projek Lebuhraya Bertingkat Sungai Besi-Ulu Kelang (SUKE) Daerah Ulu Langat, Negeri Selangor.

2.7 Area of Subject Lot: 3895 M2 (41,926 sq ft)

2.8 Area of the acquired land: 3895 M2 (41,926 sq ft)

2.9 Category of land use: Building

2.10 Status/tenure: freehold

2.11 Compensation awarded by Land Administrator for the Common Property:

Land: Nil.

Building: Nil.

Others: 46,190.00 (disturbance of business & building maintenance)

Question Of Law

[6] Firstly, it is clear law that a management corporation, upon its incorporation, is a legal entity separately from the parcel owners in the strata development: see s 39(3) of the Strata Titles Act 1985 and s 20 of the Strata Management Act 2013 , Lionel Yew Wei Ming & Anor v. Menara Duta Management Corporation, [2019] 7 AMR 660 (Su Geok Yiam J).

[7] Secondly, the common property is not part of a parcel or accessory parcel which is owned by an individual unit owner in the strata development, as is self-evident in the statutory definition of "common property" set out below and also the judgment of Idrus Harun JCA (later FCJ) in E&O Trading Sdn Bhd v. Americk Singh Sidhu & Ors, [2018] 6 MLJ 783 at para [22]:

(i) section 4 of the Strata Titles Act 1985 :

"common property" means so much of the lot as is not comprised in any parcel (including any accessory parcel), or any provisional block as shown in a certified strata plan;

(ii) section 2 of the Strata Management Act 2013 "common property:

(a) in relation to a building or land intended for subdivision into parcels, means so much of the development area:

(i) as is not comprised in any parcel or proposed parcel; and

(ii) used or capable of being used or enjoyed by occupiers of two or more parcels or proposed parcels; or

(b) in relation to a subdivided building or land, means so much of the lot:

(i) as is not comprised in any parcel, including any accessory parcel, or any provisional block as shown in a certified strata plan; and

(ii) used or capable of being used or enjoyed by occupiers of two or more parcels;

[Emphasis Added]

[8] In the third place, it is clear law that the management corporation upon its co


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