Jayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & JamilJayadeep Hari & Jamil
  • About
  • Our People
    • Partners
    • Consultant
    • Associates
  • Practice Areas
  • Publications
    • Legal Updates
    • Legal Cauldron (Temporary suspended)
    • Articles
    • News & Bulletin
  • We Care
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

Legal Update 8 of 2021

    Home Legal Updates Legal Update 8 of 2021
    NextPrevious

    Legal Update 8 of 2021

    By jhj admin | Legal Updates | 0 comment | 7 May, 2021 | 0

    Can the residents, owners and/or occupiers of properties located within the immediate vicinity of a proposed development object to a proposed development order that had been issued by the local authority?

    Case:

    PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN TRELLISES & ORS v. DATUK BANDAR KUALA LUMPUR & ORS [2021] 2 CLJ 808

    Brief Facts:

    • This case concerns a development order issued by the Datuk Bandar of Kuala Lumpur (“DBKL”), which affected Taman Rimba Kiara, a public park nestled within Taman Tun Dr Ismail (“TTDI”) and Bukit Kiara, Kuala Lumpur.

     

    • Taman Rimba Kiara was developed by the local authority of Kuala Lumpur as a public open space, green area and recreational area for the general public, in accordance with the gazetted Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan 2020 and the draft Kuala Lumpur Local Plan 2020.

     

    • In June 2016, DBKL notified the public through a notice that it had received an application for planning permission to develop, inter alia, a block of affordable apartments and 8 blocks of luxurious service apartments (“Proposed Development”) on a piece of land in Bukit Kiara (“Subject Land”).

     

    • The Subject Land was to be developed by Memang Perkasa Sdn Bhd (“Developer”) following a joint venture agreement (“JVA”) it had entered into with Yayasan Wilayah Persekutuan (“Yayasan”).

     

    • The title to the Subject Land was issued in 2014.

     

    • In 2015, the Developer applied to DBKL for planning permission for the Proposed Development.

     

    • DBKL issued a notice of the development plan and an advertisement was carried in the local newspapers, inviting comments or objections with respect to the Proposed Development.

     

    • The neighbouring residents, owners and occupiers of the Said Land (“Neighbouring Residents”) objected to the Proposed Development on the ground that it would significantly increase the density of TTDI and irreversibly degrade Taman Rimba Kiara as a green lung.

     

    • DBKL issued a notice of hearing and a hearing was convened and attended by the representatives of the Neighbouring Residents who all voiced out their objections against the Proposed Development.

     

    • At the hearing, the Neighbouring Residents also learnt that the Proposed Development also included a proposal and/or plan to construct a new flyover together with a highway-cum-expanded road network in TTDI which was not specified in the notice issued by DBKL.

     

    • Following the hearing, the Neighbouring Residents wrote to the authorities including DBKL, Yayasan and the Developer (collectively, the “Proposers”) to reiterate their objections but this was met with no response.

     

    • It was only in April 2017, that DBKL informed the Neighbouring Residents that the Proposed Development was still under evaluation and they would be informed once a decision had been made.

     

    • However, in July 2017, without any clarification on the status of the Proposed Development or any notice, the Neighbouring Residents discovered that (i) the Developer was carrying out survey works at Taman Rimba Kiara; (ii) conditional planning approval for the Proposed Development had been granted; and (iii) a development order was granted for the Proposed Development (collectively, “Impugned Decisions”).

     

    • The residents commenced a judicial review application at the High Court seeking to, amongst others, quash the Impugned Decisions of DBKL.

     

    • DBKL argued that the Neighbouring Residents has no rights/locus standi to bring the court action.

     

    • The High Court found in favour of the Proposers and the Neighbouring Residents appealed to the Court of Appeal.

    COURT OF APPEAL DECISION – APPEAL ALLOWED!

    Amongst others, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on the following basis:

     

    • The Neighbouring Residents had the requisite grounds to initiate the judicial review proceedings of DBKL’s decision because they had real and genuine interests in the subject matter of the judicial review which was the effect the Impugned Decision had on them.

     

    • The Neighbouring Residents had amply shown that they were adversely affected by the Impugned Decision in that they were residents, owners and/or occupiers of the properties located within the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Development and were users of Taman Rimba Kiara where the subject land was located.

     

    • Therefore, they had the locus standi to bring the action.
    No tags.

    jhj admin

    More posts by jhj admin

    Related Post

    • Legal Update 9 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can a civil servant be dismissed from employment by a local authority without affording him the right to be heard? Case: PIHAK BERKUASA TATATERTIB MAJLIS PERBANDARAN SEBERANG PERAI & ANOR v. MUZIADI MUKHTAR [2020] 1Read more

    • Legal Update 10 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can the payment of quit rent, assessment rates, electricity and water bills be used to prove ownership of property? Case: HS REALTY SDN BHD v. YOW HONG SOON [2020] 1 LNS 230 Brief Facts: HSRead more

    • Legal Update 11 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can accused persons who are convicted of disobeying the Movement Control Order appeal for alternative punishment instead of imprisonment in the interest of justice? Case: CHIN CHEE WEI & ANOR V PP [2020] 1 LNSRead more

    • Legal Update 12 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can a foreign national have a permanent contract of employment? Case: AHMAD ZAHRI MIRZA ABDUL HAMID v. AIMS CYBERJAYA SDN BHD [2020] 1 LNS 494 Brief Facts: Ahmad, an expatriate, received a letter of appointmentRead more

    • Legal Update 13 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can the giving of legal advice by an adjudged bankrupt, whose practising certificate has been suspended, amount to practising law in contravention of the Legal Profession Act 1976? Case: DARSHAN SINGH KHAIRA v. ZULKEFLI HASHIMRead more

    • Legal Update 14 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Can individual parcel owners enforce rights relating to common property on their own behalf? Case: SYARIKAT EAST COAST & ORS v. MAKNA MUJUR SDN BHD & ORS [2020] 2 MLRA 440 Brief Facts: Syarikat EastRead more

    • Legal Update 15 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      When is the point of time when a debtor is considered to be unable to pay his debts? Case: AFFIN BANK BERHAD V. ABU BAKAR ISMAIL [2020] 2 MLRA 99 Brief Facts: Affin Bank BerhadRead more

    • Legal Update 16 of 2020

      By jhj admin | 0 comment

      Whether an article containing allegations of corrupt practices and giving of bribes was defamatory to the owner of an education institution? Case: EAGLE ONE INVESTMENT LTD & ORS V. ASIA PACIFIC HIGHER LEARNING SDN BHDRead more

    Leave a Comment

    Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    NextPrevious

    JHJ Bulletin

    • S.Jeyaraman: The Magic of Memory
    • Andreas Dorn: Your Unconscious Mind on Change and Money

    Legal Updates

    • Legal Update 22 of 2022
    • Legal Update 21 of 2022
    • Legal Update 20 of 2022
    • Legal Update 19 of 2022
    • Legal Update 18 of 2022
    • Legal Update 17 of 2022
    • Legal Update 16 of 2022

    Legal Cauldron

    • 2
      0

      Legal Cauldron 1 of 2016

      Click here to view & download
    • 2
      0

      Legal Cauldron 2 of 2015

      Click here to view & download
    Copyright 2017 All Rights Reserved Contact Us         Like & Follow Us On:Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
    • About
    • Our People
      • Partners
      • Consultant
      • Associates
    • Practice Areas
    • Publications
      • Legal Updates
      • Legal Cauldron (Temporary suspended)
      • Articles
      • News & Bulletin
    • We Care
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
    Jayadeep Hari & Jamil