SIBU: The Kuching High Court’s decision to rule Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD) for late handover of properties in Sarawak only starting from Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA), not from the date of booking, was welcomed by Deputy Minister II for Public Health, Housing and Local Government Michael Tiang Ming Tee.
He said this on Thursday (March 24), adding that the decision was timely and had allayed confusion among developers and home buyers.
“The decision of the High Court is important because since the last Federal Court decision, it has caused great concern among developers in Sarawak.
“The decision of the High Court today correctly interprets the Sarawak Ordinance that the provisions related to the matter are not the same as the law in Peninsular Malaysia.”
Tiang, who is also Pelawan assemblyman, said the Federal Court in Peninsular Malaysia had ruled that the LAD started when the buyer of the house or apartment paid the booking fee.
He said the High Court’s decision clarified that the booking was not a commitment or a contract. Instead, it was only an option for the developer to the buyer that they are interested in buying the property. “The actual contract starts when the buyer signs a sale and purchase agreement.”
Meanwhile, RJ Realty Sdn Bhd applied for judicial review in the Kuching High Court for a case where the Sarawak Housing Tribunal had followed the Federal Court’s decision in PJD Regency Sdn Bhd v. Home Buyers & Anor Claims Tribunal and Other Appeals in awarding LAD for late delivery of property from date of booking order date.
The decision raised concerns among home developers, and on Thursday, the Kuching High Court ruled that the Federal Court’s decision on the PJD Regency Sdn Bhd case did not apply to Sarawak and Sabah.
High Court Judicial Commissioner Alexander Siew How Wai ruled that PJD Regency Sdn Bhd v. Home Buyers & Anor Claims Tribunal and Other Appeals was decided under the Peninsular Malaysia Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 and the Regulations, which do not apply in Sarawak.
He said although there were similarities in words, the Sarawak Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Ordinance 2013 was not in pari materia (in the same matter) with the West Malaysia Housing Act.
//END WITH PIX
SBW-tiang court-2403-alv(T)-1
