The Tribunal's decisions on maintenance charges and strata roll inspection were legally flawed, warranting judicial review due to lack of jurisdiction and rationale.

Introduction

[1] The Applicant filed an application for judicial review (Enel. 12) under O 53 of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC).

[2] Leave was granted to the Applicant for application for judicial review against the Respondents to seek the following reliefs:

2.1 That the Applicant be granted leave to apply for an order of Certiorari to be moved in this Honourable Court to quash part of the decision of the Strata Management Tribunal (Tribunal) claim as awarded in Award No: TPS/M-5434-12/2022 dated 11 April 2023 in Putrajaya, Wilayah Persekutuan (the said Tribunal Award), in particular:-

(a) First order of the said Tribunal Award;

(b) Fourth order of the said Tribunal Award; and

(c) Fifth order of the said Tribunal Award.

2.2 An order of Certiorari to be granted to quash part of the decision of the Tribunal as awarded in the said Tribunal Award, in particular:

(a) First order of the said Tribunal Award;

(b) Fourth order of the said Tribunal Award; and

(c) Fifth order of the said Tribunal Award.

2.3 Stay of execution of the said Tribunal Award;

2.4 Costs of RM400.00 under the Tribunal Award to be refunded by the 2nd Respondent to the Applicant within seven (7) days from the date of order of certiorari;

2.5 That said Tribunal Award awarded by the Tribunal on 11 April 2023 is illegal, irrational and/or procedurally improper which warrants a judicial review by this Honourable High Court;

2.6 That the Applicant be granted leave to pray for a declaration that the Tribunal had erred in failing to take into account the facts and the defence put forward by the Applicant in arriving at its decision when making the Award dated 11 April 2023;

[3] After the hearing, I allowed the Applicant's application for judicial review (Enel. 12). This judgment contains the full reasons for my decision.

Background Facts

[4] The Applicant is the Management Corporation (MC) for a development area known as Hatten Square (Development Area).

[5] The 1st Respondent is the Tribunal that is established under s 102 of the Strata Management Act 2013 ( SMA 2013).

[6] The 2nd Respondent is the proprietor of Unit F2-006 (the Unit) having an address of service at Level 23, One Mont Kiara, 1 Jalan Kiara, 50480 Kuala Lumpur.

[7] On 24 April 2021, the Joint Management Body of Hatten Square Lot 1348 (JMB) is established.

[8] The first Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the JMB was held on 24 April 2021.

[9] The MC was established on 19 February 2016.

[10] The first AGM of the MC is then held on 30 July 2022.

[11] On 14 September 2022, the 2nd Respondent had filed a first Form 1. This matter did not proceed.

[12] On 1 December 2022 the 2nd Respondent filed a 2nd Form 1 claiming against the Applicant under reg 6 of the Strata Management (Strata Management Tribunal) Regulations 2015 (SMT Regulations 2015) for amongst others:

(a) that JMC's resolution in fixing different rates for different types of parcels does not conform to s 21 and Section 25 of the SMA 2013 (Claim 1).

(b) That Applicant did not comply with Section IV art 53 of the SMA 2013 by issuing an invoice under the name of Developer prior to the maintenance account and a sinking fund account have been opened in the name of the Applicant (Claim 2);

(c) that the Applicant did not comply with s 12, Second Schedule of the SMA 2013 with regard to notice on AGM (Claim 3); and

(d) that a copy of the strata roll to be provided to verif