DAMANSARA REALTY BHD vs BUNGSAR HILL HOLDINGS SDN BHD & ANOR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 MarsdenLR 1025

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DAMANSARA REALTY BHD – Appellant
Versus
BUNGSAR HILL HOLDINGS SDN BHD & ANOR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Alex De Silva,S Shamalah ,Respondent Advocate: Tommy Thomas,Alan Gomez

Table of Content
1. appeal against high court decision (Para 1 , 2 , 5)
2. background facts of the agreement (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. appellant's argument for exercising development rights (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. respondents' counterargument on timely development (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
5. determination of repudiatory breach (Para 29 , 40 , 41)
6. court's interpretation of contractual obligations (Para 46 , 50 , 52 , 54)
7. dissenting judgment and counterarguments (Para 58 , 60)

Hishamudin Mohd Yunus JCA:

Preliminary

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant plaintiff against the decision of the High Court of Kuala Lumpur dismissing the appellant's/plaintiff's claim for (among others):

(a) a declaration that the notice of termination dated 25 October 2007 issued by the respondents/defendants terminating an agreement of 7 January 1993 ('Property Development Agreement') between the appellant and the respondents was unlawfully issued, and hence invalid; and

(b) a consequential order for the specific performance of the Property Development Agreement.

[2] We, by a majority decision (Kang Hwee Gee JCA dissenting), have dismissed the appeal with costs. We now give our gr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 MarsdenLR 1025

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYADAMANSARA REALTY BHD – AppellantVersusBUNGSAR HILL HOLDINGS SDN BHD & ANOR – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DAMANSARA REALTY BHD – Appellant
Versus
BUNGSAR HILL HOLDINGS SDN BHD & ANOR – Respondent