KIJAL RESORT SDN BHD vs PENTADBIR TANAH KEMAMAN & ANOR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2014 MarsdenLR 1351

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
KIJAL RESORT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
PENTADBIR TANAH KEMAMAN & ANOR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Rosli Dahlan,Bahari Yeow,Ho Ai Ting ,Respondent Advocate: Azhar Abd Hamid

Table of Content
1. judicial review application process and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments about timely filing of judicial review. (Para 3 , 5)
3. background facts leading to the appeal. (Para 4)
4. summary of preliminary objections and appeals. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 12)
5. issues regarding the service of notices and legal requirements. (Para 10 , 11 , 13 , 20)
6. interpretation of the land acquisition act. (Para 15 , 54 , 56)
7. jurisdictional issues in non-compliance with timeframes. (Para 30 , 66 , 72 , 73)
8. dismissal of appeal with costs. (Para 84)

[1] This is an appeal, by the appellant, Kijal Resort Sdn Bhd against the unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal dated 1 August 2012 dismissing the appellant's appeal on preliminary objections against the decision of the High Court dated 21 June 2009 dismissing the appellant's application for judicial review to quash the decision of the Land Administrator. The appellant had on 30 July 2013 obtained leave to appeal to the Federal Court pursuant to s 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA 1964).

Factual Background

[2] The appellant, at all material times, was the registered proprietor of part of the land known as Lot 3168,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 MarsdenLR 1351

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYAKIJAL RESORT SDN BHD – AppellantVersusPENTADBIR TANAH KEMAMAN & ANOR – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
KIJAL RESORT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
PENTADBIR TANAH KEMAMAN & ANOR – Respondent