Back
2020 MarsdenLR 2584
HIGH COURT MALAYA IPOH
LIZIZ PLANTATION – Appellant
Versus
LIEW AH YONG – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: AA-24NCVC-82-02-2020]
A transfer application must consider jurisdiction and factors of convenience, alongside modern technological capabilities facilitating remote litigation.
Headnote:The Plaintiff initiated action against the Defendant for the removal of private caveats under the National Land Code. The Defendant sought to transfer the action citing jurisdiction and convenience, arguing the case's connection to Kelantan. The Court addressed the jurisdiction under the Federal Constitution and found that the case could be fairly tried in the High Court in Malaya, rejecting the transfer application. The Court emphasized the importance of technological advancements in the judicial process and determined that the continued trial in current jurisdiction served the interests of justice.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. determination of jurisdiction in land disputes. (Para 1) |
| 2. plaintiff claims caveat removal. (Para 2 , 3) |
[1] With the growing acceptance of remote communication technology, should the forum of the Court be changed to keep pace with where the Defendant has his place of residence or business?
Nature of action
[2] The Plaintiff filed this action on 21 February 2020 against the Defendant for inter alia an Order that private caveats lodged by the latter be removed pursuant to s 327 of the National Land Code 1965 ("NLC"). The Plaintiff claims amongst others that the entry of these private caveats was wrongful and seeks damages pursuant to s 329 of the NLC.
[3] The private caveats were lodged under Presentation Number 42/2020 dated 7 January 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "private caveats") over the lands held under issued documents of title PN 10052, PN 10051, HS(D) 702 Mukim Relai and HS (D) 1644, HS (D) 3928, HS (D) 3927 and HS (D) 3926 Mukim Ulu Nenggiri, Jajahan Gua Musang, Negeri Kelantan (hereinafter referred to as "the said Lands").
