Back
2023 MarsdenLR 2047
HIGH COURT (KUALA LUMPUR)
ROZANA ALI YUSOFF, J
Lonely Planet Inn Sdn Bhd & Ors – Plaintiff
Versus
Amber Court Management Corporation – Defendant
CIVIL SUIT NO WA-22NCvC-187-04 OF 2023
An interlocutory injunction may be granted when there is a genuine issue to be resolved, and irreparable harm may arise if access is denied, emphasizing the balance of convenience in favor of the applicant.
Headnote:(A) Strata Titles Act 1985 - Strata Management Act 2013 - Specific Relief Act 1950 - Interlocutory injunction sought for access to lifts and staircases pending litigation - Plaintiffs claim denial of access constitutes harm and hardship due to alleged non-payment of disputed debts - Defendants assert right to restrict access due to outstanding payments. (Paras 1, 2, 18)
(B) Interlocutory Injunction - Criteria for granting encompass existence of a bona fide serious issue, adequacy of damages as a remedy, and balance of convenience favoring the plaintiff - Courts focus on preventing irreparable injury during litigation rather than determining case strengths. (Paras 10, 12, 17)
Facts of the case:
Plaintiffs own multiple units in a condominium; access cards for lifts were contingent on the payment of service charges claimed as disputed resulting in limited access to their units. (Paras 2, 6, 18)
Findings of Court:
Interim injunction granted based on the potential irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and the balance of convenience favoring the Plaintiffs. Defendant ordered to allow access to lifts and issue access cards. (Paras 19)
Issues: Whether Defendant's actions in denying access cards and labeling Plaintiffs as defaulters were lawful and if the Plaintiffs demonstrated sufficient grounds for injunctive relief. (Paras 17)
Ratio Decidendi: Court highlighted the need for a bona fide serious issue to be tried, irreparable harm to the Plaintiffs without access, and assessed that the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction. (Paras 17)
Result: Interim injunction application granted; access to lifts allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interlocutory injunction application details. (Para 1 , 1) |
| 2. background facts and context. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. plaintiffs' grounds for injunction. (Para 8) |
| 4. defendant's counterarguments. (Para 9) |
| 5. court's analysis of injunction criteria. (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. court's decision on balance of convenience. (Para 18) |
[1]This is an application by the Plaintiffs for an Interlocutory Injunction (Enclosure 4) pursuant to Order 29 Rule 1 of the Rules of Court 2012 ( ROC 2012) Section 51 (1)Specific Relief Act 1950interparte on 05.07.2023. The prayers sought by the Plaintiffs are as follows: -
[i]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its office bearers and management committee and/or its agents compelling them to grant full access and use of all the lifts and/or staircases in Amber Court Condominium to the Plaintiffs and/or their tenants and/or their occupants with immediate effect pending determination and disposal of this suit;
[ii]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its management committee and council members and/or its agents compelling them to issue fully functional electromagnetic access cards to the Plaintiffs and/or their tenants and/or their occupants to enable use of the lifts and staircases connecting to their respective unit in Amber Court pending determination and disposal of this suit;
[iii]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its management committee and/or its agents restraining from doing any acts and/or continuing to do acts including but not limited to demanding full payment and/or any payment for the Disputed Debt such as service charges, sinking fund contributions and quit rent pending determination and disposal of this suit;
[iv]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its office bearers and management committee and/or its agents restraining them from doing any acts and/or continuing to do acts to label and/or deem and/or treat the Plaintiffs as Defaulters under the Building Maintenance and Sinking Fund of the Defendant for the Disputed Debt pending determination and disposal of this suit;
[v]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its office bearers and management committee and/or its agents restraining them from exercising their powers and duties and/or doing any acts or continuing to do acts for a collateral purpose to pressure the Plaintiffs to pay the Disputed Debt pending determination and disposal of this suit; and
[vi]An interim injunction against the Defendant and/or its office bearers and management committee and/or its agents restraining them from doing any acts and/or continuing to do acts to interfere and/or attempt to interfere with the Plaintiffs and/or their tenants and/or their occupants quite enjoyment of their units in Amber Court pending determination and disposal of this suit.
B. BACKGROUND FACTS
[2]The Plaintiffs are the registered owners/parcel proprietors of 66 condominium unit in Amber Court Condominium (Amber Court). The Defendant is the Management Corporation of Amber Court incorporated under the Strata Titles Act 1985 .
[3]Amber Court is a high-rise apartment complex located in Genting Highlands, Pahang which contains two 23-storey apartment towers including three levels of car parks and two levels of retail podiums. There are approximately 741 apartments in Amber Court.
[4]The Plaintiffs’ units are located between the 6th – 23rd in either tower in Amber Court. There are several access points to the units in Amber Court served by 6 lifts with 3 lifts located in each tower. Amber Court has fire exit staircases located throughout the building. There are 2 staircases, 1 in each tower that serve as fire exits located at the opposite ends of the building.
[5]On 14.09.2022, the Defendant issued a notice (1st Notice) to the Plaintiffs informing them the implementation of the access card system and requiring them to apply for electromagnetic access card to use the lifts and staircases con
