JUDGMENT

Ahmad Shahrir Mohd Salleh J:

Introduction

[1] This is an action by the plaintiffs who are proprietors of respective units in K Residence Condominium. The plaintiffs seek damages for diminution in property value and loss of rental income. The plaintiffs allege that these losses arose from the defendants' mismanagement of the condominium.

[2] The 1st defendant, KL Landmark Sdn Bhd, was both the developer and the management corporation during the material period. The 2nd defendant, City Properties Sdn Bhd, was the landowner. The 3rd and 4th defendants, Yap Yong Seong and Yap Wee Sean, were directors of the 2nd defendant.

[3] The plaintiffs rely on an expert valuation to support their claim. The plaintiffs seek compensation for the difference between the current market value of their units and the hypothetical value had the condominium been properly maintained.

[4] Upon careful evaluation of the evidence and consideration of the submissions, this court finds that the plaintiffs have failed, on the balance of probabilities, to prove their claim.

Brief Background Of Facts

[5] K Residence Condominium was developed by the 1st defendant on land owned by the 2nd defendant. Individual purchasers entered into sale and purchase agreements with the 1st defendant for the acquisition of their respective units. The 3rd and 4th defendants were directors of the 2nd defendant throughout the relevant period.

[6] Between 2008 and 2018, various issues allegedly arose concerning the management and maintenance of the condominium. These included problems relating to the - system, water supply, drainage, lifts and general upkeep. A technical report by Ecogreen Base documented numerous defects. These included poor maintenance of the air-conditioning system, faulty CCTV, lift breakdowns, unclean water tanks and defective corridor lighting.

[7] In September 2018, a Joint Management Body ("JMB") was established for K Residence Condominium pursuant to the Strata Management Act 2013 ("SMA 2013"). This occurred approximately two months before the filing of the present suit. With the formation of the JMB, statutory responsibility for the maintenance account and common property matters transferred to the new body.

[8] In November 2018, the plaintiffs filed this action against all four defendants. The claim was based on alleged breaches of management duties, fraudulent conduct and negligent maintenance of condominium facilities. The plaintiffs sought damages representing the difference between the present market value of their units and the hypothetical value had proper maintenance been undertaken throughout the material period.

[9] During the relevant period, several specific transactions and arrangements were undertaken. These included payments by the 1st defendant to Miles and Miles Leisure Sdn Bhd for concierge services, imposition of utility charges by the 2nd defendant, tenancy arrangements with the Moroccan Embassy and the granting of maintenance charge waivers to certain unit owners. The plaintiffs also alleged that office units at Levels 5 and 6 were improperly converted from common property to the ownership of the 2nd defendant.

[10] The trial proceeded with testimony from several witnesses. Only one of the thirty-seven plaintiffs, Wong Cheun Yan Brian, testified. Expert valuation evidence was presented through Nagalingam Thandavan (SP6). The defendants called several witnesses, including company directors and expert valuers.

Analysis And Findings

Locus Standi Following Formation Of Joint Management Body

[11] The defendants contend that the plaintiffs lack the necessary locus standi to pursue claims relating to maintenance matters following the establishment of the JMB on 15 September 2018. The defendants rely on s 15(1) of the SMA 2013 which vests exclusive control of the maintenance account in the JMB. The defendants further contend that s 143(2) of the SMA 2013 reserves proceedings concerning common property to the JMB. The defendants posit that the present