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

2015 MarsdenLR 1292

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
AU KEAN HOE – Appellant
Versus
PERSATUAN PENDUDUK DVILLA EQUESTRIAN – Respondent


Table of Content
1. appeal regarding nuisance and obstruction from boom gates. (Para 1 , 2)
2. high court findings on nuisance and obstruction. (Para 4 , 5)
3. approval of structures is paramount to legality. (Para 15 , 21)
4. inconvenience does not equate to actionable nuisance. (Para 23 , 24)
Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin CJM:

Introduction

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Court of Appeal in dismissing the appellant's appeal against the decision of the High Court at Shah Alam. The High Court had dismissed the appellant's claim against the respondent for nuisance and obstruction as well as for injunction and allowing the respondent's counterclaim for damages to the boom gates and for the order restraining the appellant from harassing the committee members of the respondent and the security guards.

[2] Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the appellant sought and obtained leave from this Court to appeal against the said decision on the following two questions of law:

(1) Whether the erecting of a guard house and a boom gate across a public road in a residential area amounts to an obstruction within the meaning of s 46(1)(a) of the Street, Drain

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top