Govt succeeds in overturning order to transfer Duta Enclave land title to Semantan Estate
24 Jun 2025 01:53pm
The Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur Land Registrar succeeded in its appeal to overturn the High Court's ruling that had ordered it to transfer the title of the 263.272-acre "Duta enclave' land in Kuala Lumpur back to Semantan Estate (1952) Sdn Bhd. Photo - 123RF
PUTRAJAYA - The Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur Land Registrar succeeded in its appeal to overturn the High Court's ruling that had ordered it to transfer the title of the 263.272-acre "Duta enclave' land in Kuala Lumpur back to Semantan Estate (1952) Sdn Bhd.
A three-member bench consisting Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Court of Appeal judges Datuk Azimah Omar and Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh had allowed the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur Land Registrar's appeal to set aside the High Court's decision.
Justice Lee, held that the 2009 High Court decision, did not order the Government of Malaysia to transfer the subject land back to Semantan Estate.
"As such, there was no order to execute. In the absence of an order for the transfer of the land back to Semantan Estate, an order for declaration cannot be executed, as it is only declarative of the rights of parties.
He said a declaratory order merely affirms the legal rights of parties involved and it does not carry with it the power of enforcement, such as specific performance, adding that such orders are non-executable by nature.
Justice Lee, who delivered the court's unanimous decision, however, ruled that Semantan Estate is entitled to adequate compensation, to be assessed from the year 1956, the time the government took possession of the land. Semantan Estate's legal battle began in 2003 when it sued the government, claiming the land was unlawfully acquired. Photo - Canva
The company, he said, is also entitled to mesne profits for the land, which will continue to accrue until the government fully settles the compensation. The amount of mesne profits, to be assessed by the High Court, shall no longer be payable once full payment of compensation has been made.
He also directed parties to file their expert valuation report on the market value of the subject land as at December 3, 1956, within 90 days from today.
Justice Lee said two payments made by the government - RM1.321 million on December 21, 1956, and another RM79, 241 on February 3, 1959 - would be deducted from the amount of compensation to be assessed.
He also awarded interest of six per annum to the company from December 3, 1956 to the date of payment upon payment of the compensation as assessed.
The disputed land, located in the prime Jalan Duta area known as the Duta Enclave, houses government buildings that include the national hockey stadium, Malaysian Institute of Integrity, national archives, Kuala Lumpur Syariah Court, the Inland Revenue Board building and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Academy.
Semantan Estate's legal battle began in 2003 when it sued the government, claiming the land was unlawfully acquired.
In 2009, Judicial Commissioner Zura Yahya ruled in favour of Semantan Estate that the government had unlawfully acquired the land. The government's subsequent appeals at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court were unsuccessful.
In February 2017, Semantan Estate initiated a lawsuit against the Kuala Lumpur Land Registrar to enforce the 2009 High Court judgment. - BERNAMA
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Express
2 hours ago
- Daily Express
PacifiCity buyers lose court bid
Published on: Sunday, August 03, 2025 Published on: Sun, Aug 03, 2025 Text Size: Kota Kinabalu: The High Court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by PacifiCity condominium purchasers against Sabah Development Bank Berhad (SDB), dealing a blow to seeking compensation for the troubled mixed-use development. The suit, initiated by the PacifiCity Project Purchasers Welfare Association, was brought against five parties involved in the troubled project in Kota Kinabalu - Apex Juta Sdn Bhd (developer of the residential component), Pacific Sanctuary Holdings Sdn Bhd (developer of the commercial component), Majlis Kebajikan dan Rekreasi Kakitangan Kerajaan Negeri Sabah (Maksak), the landowner, Kuok Khoon Ping @ Kuek Koon Ping, the director of the developer and SDB, the project's bridging financier. The purchasers alleged that SDB was negligent, breached its duty of care and failed to safeguard their interests following the abandonment of the project, despite the issuance of a Certificate of Practical Completion in November 2020. Messrs Ronny Cham & Co appeared for the plaintiffs, while SDB was represented by Messrs Tan, Arthur Borine & Partners, who submitted that the plaintiffs' claims were riddled with legal misconceptions, unsupported by evidence and internally inconsistent. They characterised the suit as a broad attempt to target every possible party in the hope of extracting compensation. They argued it would not be fair, just, or reasonable to impose a duty of care on the bank in the circumstances, and urged the court to dismiss the claim in its entirety. The court concurred with the bank's position and dismissed the claim against SDB in full. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
The Star
5 hours ago
- The Star
Redesigning national development
THE 13th Malaysia Plan (13MP) 2026–2030, launched by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim last Thursday with the tagline 'Redesigning Develop-ment', outlines three main policy thrusts for the next five years. First, strengthening good governance to ensure equitable wealth distribution and people-centric administration; second, fostering comprehensive economic diversity to create value across all sectors; and third, focusing on inclusive and responsive development with an emphasis on improving the people's quality of life. All of these are designed to be executed with careful attention to the denyut nadi rakyat – the pulse of the people – so that the goals laid out can be achieved over the next five years. But these aspirations will only materialise if stakeholders at every level work together and deliver what has been planned. Too often plans falter due to leakages or abuses of power by those entrusted to implement them. This is why, to me, the first thrust – ensuring good governance – must be treated as the central pillar in achieving successful development. To support the Economy Ministry in this direction, Universiti Malaya's International Institute of Public Policy & Management (Inpuma) has launched a nationwide 13MP Townhall Series. This initiative is part of an ongoing research effort to help Malaysians understand their role in the country's development process. Adopting the approach of 'You Speak, We Listen and Record', the townhalls have yielded rich insights from citizens across diverse backgrounds. To support the Economy Ministry in this direction, Universiti Malaya's Inpuma has launched a nationwide 13MP Townhall Series, says the writer. The first leg of the tour covered three strategically chosen locations: Sandakan and Kota Kinabalu in Sabah, and Bandar Tun Razak in Kuala Lumpur. Together, these locations offer a composite view of the nation's current realities, from rural and urban issues to quality-of-life concerns in both Bornean Malaysia and Peninsular Malay-sia. In Sandakan and Kota Kinabalu, citizens voiced deep and persistent concerns over basic infrastructure: access to clean water, Internet coverage, poor public transport, and uneven healthcare and education facilities. Many felt left behind compared with states in Peninsular Malaysia. A Sandakan resident stressed that water supply is the most critical issue: 'We've faced this for over 10 years.' Here, the people are not asking for grand development projects, they just want their basic rights restored: clean water and roads accessible year-round. It made me wonder: Should such long-standing water issues require federal intervention? What is the role of local leadership in resolving this? Is the issue a result of weak policies, or has there been abuse of power and misaligned priorities? In Kota Kinabalu, the focus shifted to affordable housing and quality employment. Young graduates expressed frustration at the lack of economic opportunities, which has driven many to move to Peninsular Malaysia or abroad. Concerns were also raised about unplanned urban development, pollution, traffic congestion, and misaligned growth. Many of these issues brought up during the townhall sessions directly echo the themes the Prime Minister outlined on July 31. In contrast, residents in Bandar Tun Razak centred their concerns on the rising cost of living, quality of public services, and work-life balance. Parents worried about education quality, overcrowded schools, and the lack of youth recreational activities in public housing areas. Retirees spoke of the burden of healthcare costs, despite being former civil servants. Post-pandemic challenges also emerged, including elderly care, mental health support, and calls for more efficient digital government services. Despite differing geographies, cultures, and lifestyles, all three communities shared a unifying aspiration: they want policies that truly reflect and serve them. The overwhelming sentiment is that people want to be heard – not just during policy planning, but in implementation and outcome monitoring as well. Which is why I am glad the Prime Minister gave emphasis in his speech to monitoring development projects. There is a deep sense of disappointment when longstanding promises – particularly around water, roads, and housing – go unfulfilled. Yet hope remains. As one Kota Kinabalu resident told me privately, 'We want to believe in the government again – show us that through 13MP.' The 13MP is an opportunity for a national reset – not just in terms of physical development, but in reshaping our socioeconomic policies to match the people's living realities. This plan must adopt a people-centric approach that leverages local data, expands inclusive monitoring systems, and places trust in communities to lead local development initiatives. Earlier this week, I was invited to deliver the keynote address at a roundtable hosted by the Institute of Social Malaysia (ISM) to chart its future strategic direction. I began by painting a picture of Malaysia in 2050. To plan effectively for the future, we must anticipate the challenges ahead. This is why foresight and scenario planning are essential, along with leveraging local data and inclusive monitoring systems. I proposed that ISM take on the role of a national Social Research Institute. This ties directly to the findings of our 13MP research, which underline the need for consistent public discourse in our policy ecosystem. It also underscores the importance of a dedicated institution that continuously studies, analyses, and monitors sociopolitical changes grounded in public sentiment. One recurring observation from our townhalls was the lack of community-based development planning, particularly in public housing areas. In rural areas, school facilities are often inadequate, while in urban zones, schools may lack basic amenities like fields for physical education. Taken together, these findings highlight the urgent need to strengthen people-centric approaches in national development planning and policy implementation. The townhalls have clearly captured both the aspirations and constraints of everyday Malaysians – factors that must directly shape future five-year plans. The message from the ground is unequivocal: Malaysians are ready to take part in nation- building, provided they are not sidelined. The 13MP, as presented by the Prime Minister, is a plan that seeks to provide human- centric development, rebuild public trust, and return Malaysia to a path of inclusive and equitable progress. To truly redesign national development, we must listen to and reflect the pulse of the people. May the 13MP lead Malaysia towards greater prosperity and lasting success. Datuk Dr Anis Yusal Yusoff is the executive director of the International Institute of Public Policy and Management, Universiti Malaya. He was formerly the president and CEO of the Malaysian Institute of Integrity.
Borneo Post
7 hours ago
- Borneo Post
Validity based on law
Hibah can be challenged in court by the heirs if there are weaknesses or non-compliance with legal or religious requirements. — Bernama photo HIBAH, which in Islamic law refers to assets voluntarily given or transferred to a beneficiary by a person during their lifetime, is generally viewed as final and not open to dispute. However, a recent decision by the High Court came as a shock to many when it annulled a 'takaful' (Islamic insurance) hibah worth RM1 million that had been given to the policyholder's widow. [This case involved a takaful policyholder who named his wife as the hibah recipient. But, after his death, his family filed a claim in the Syariah Court to challenge the takaful hibah, but the court upheld the widow's right to the funds. The family then brought the case before the Civil Court, which ruled in favour of the family and ordered that the funds be redistributed according to 'faraid', or Islamic inheritance law]. The case has sparked a heated debate on social media because the general perception is that hibah cannot be challenged by other heirs. Many netizens, who had placed full trust in the 'immunity' of hibah from legal disputes, questioned the validity of takaful hibah. Some even accused their takaful agents of being 'scammers' because there is no guarantee that the hibah cannot be challenged in court. 'It can be challenged' According to lawyer Dr Mahmud Abdul Jumaat, hibah is a voluntary transfer of property from a giver to a recipient during the giver's lifetime, usually done to avoid inheritance disputes later on. Hibah also refers to the immediate transfer of asset ownership, made without expecting anything in return and based on love or affection. 'However, in reality, hibah can be challenged in court by the heirs if there are weaknesses or non-compliance with legal or religious requirements, like, for example, the hibah document is unclear or incomplete. 'Similarly, if the gift (hibah) doesn't fulfil the pillars and conditions of Islamic law or lacks the recipient's consent, or the property is not fully owned by the giver, then heirs have the right to question its validity in court. 'Challenges usually arise when heirs feel dissatisfied, for example, if they believe the hibah undermines their faraid rights, or suspect fraud or coercion in the process,' he tells Bernama. Hibah also refers to the immediate transfer of asset ownership, made without expecting anything in return, and based on love or affection. — Bernama photo Mahmud says if a hibah is made while the giver is suffering from a terminal illness, it (gift) will be treated as part of the giver's estate and, hence, will be subject to the appropriate conditions. In such cases, he points out that the heirs may challenge the hibah on the grounds that it violates Islamic inheritance laws. He also clarified that under Malaysia's legal framework, hibah falls under the jurisdiction of both the syariah and civil courts. 'The Syariah Court holds specific authority to verify the validity of a hibah under Islamic law, while estate administration (distribution of estate after death) falls under civil jurisdiction, such as the Small Estate Office or the Civil High Court. 'Conflicts can arise if there's overlap or confusion between these two jurisdictions. 'For instance, heirs may challenge a hibah in Civil Court by claiming that the property concerned is still part of the estate and must be distributed via faraid, even if the Syariah Court has already confirmed the hibah as valid. 'This was exactly what happened in the recent takaful hibah court case, where a legal technicality (involving Schedule 10 of the Islamic Financial Services Act (IFSA) 2013 regarding hibah nominations) led to a contradiction between the syariah and civil court rulings. 'Overall, a hibah can be challenged if it doesn't meet religious or legal conditions. 'But if it is properly executed in line with syariah principles and legal requirements, it is usually upheld as valid, even if contested,' he explains. Understanding the procedures On experts and estate planning practitioners' assertion that hibah remains a relevant instrument for asset distribution as long as the procedures are carried out properly, Mahmud says the fact that hibah can be challenged does not mean it is automatically invalid or illegal. Rather, it simply means hibah is not an 'untouchable' instrument immune from scrutiny. 'If something is challengeable, it doesn't mean it's inherently bad. 'Just like a 'wasiat' (will) or any other legal document, hibah offers a good solution for estate planning, but it must be executed carefully in accordance with Islamic principles. 'In fact, under Islamic law, hibah is permissible and considered a suitable practice as long as it doesn't contradict faraid and fulfils syariah requirements. 'The recent court case highlights the importance of understanding the legal processes involved in hibah, rather than rejecting its benefits outright,' he says. Dr Mahmud Abdul Jumaat Mahmud adds that it is important to realise that the court challenges usually stem from technical or procedural weaknesses, and not because the concept of hibah is invalid. Pointing to the recent court case, he says it involves specific legal provisions (takaful hibah nominations under IFSA 2013), adding that the court decision is not final yet as it is expected to be appealed. Mahmud also observes that most other forms of hibah, such as property, cash or other assets, are recognised as valid as long as they fulfil the necessary conditions. 'Therefore, the people need not panic, but should instead focus on strengthening their hibah procedures. 'Hibah continues to be an important tool for Islamic estate planning in Malaysia. 'It allows the wishes of the deceased to be honoured – for example, protecting the welfare of specific family members or chosen recipients – without breaching faraid, if handled correctly. 'What's crucial is to understand that hibah is not an absolute guarantee on paper alone. 'It requires proper understanding and correct execution to ensure the giver's intentions are fulfilled smoothly and without future disputes,' he says. Alternatives According to Mahmud, aside from hibah, there are several alternative methods to transfer wealth or assets to the loved ones that carry a lower risk of being challenged. These include direct transfers during one's lifetime through standard ownership transfers or gifts, without relying on formal hibah documents. 'For example, a husband may give cash or transfer property ownership to his wife legally while still alive. 'Once the property is registered in the wife's name, it becomes her absolute right and is no longer considered part of the husband's estate after his death. 'In other words, assets given during the giver's lifetime are not subject to faraid distribution because the ownership has already changed hands before death. 'These direct transfers – whether via a deed of gift, transfer of ownership at the land office for real estate, or bank account balance transfer – can help avoid disputes as other heirs no longer have a claim on the assets given as gifts. 'In addition, married couples may consider joint ownership arrangements – for example, registering assets like a house or bank account under both husband and wife's names. 'Depending on legal practices, this method sometimes allows the asset to automatically pass to the surviving joint owner without going through the inheritance process.' Mahmud also points out that for Muslim couples in Malaysia, a wife can also make a claim for joint matrimonial property in the Syariah Court after the husband's death, and vice versa. Through this claim, the court will determine a portion of the jointly acquired assets as the wife's rightful share. This portion is removed from the deceased's estate and cannot be disputed by other heirs as it already belongs to the wife. Another alternative is to use a trust as an asset distribution tool. The asset owner can appoint a trustee institution or trust company, such as Amanah Raya Bhd or a private trust firm, and transfer specific assets to the trustee through a formal trust agreement, with instructions that the assets be held for the benefit of a chosen recipient. 'For instance, a father might place a sum of money or property into a trust for his child under certain conditions. 'Upon his death, those assets would not be included in his estate because they were already placed in trust during his lifetime. 'The trustee would then distribute the assets to the child according to the terms of the trust, and other heirs could not challenge it because legally, the assets no longer belonged to the deceased at the time of death,' he says, adding that trusts usually involve costs and require professional management. 'Wills can be challenged' Explaining that Muslims can also consider making a will, Mahmud says this is permissible within certain limits, one of which is that only up to one-third of the estate (after deducting debts) can be given to non-heirs. Additionally, a will cannot include faraid heirs – unless with the consent of all other heirs. A will is a written or verbal declaration by someone about how their assets should be distributed after death and it only takes effect upon their passing. 'If the will exceeds the legal limit, or is made in favour of a faraid heir without the consent of others, it can be challenged. 'Any portion exceeding one-third will revert to faraid distribution, and any bequest to an heir without consent will be invalid, unless all other heirs agree to it. 'For Muslims, a will must be validated by the Syariah Court via a will confirmation order, whereas for non-Muslims, the probate process must be conducted in the Civil Court before assets can be distributed. 'Wills take time and may be contested if there are questions about their validity,' he adds. 'Documents must be complete' To ensure a hibah is strong and less likely to be challenged, Mahmud says both the giver and the recipient must make sure that its documentation is clear and complete. It should include details such as the identities of the giver and the recipient; a description of the asset to be given as gift; declarations of the offer and acceptance; signatures; and witnesses. He also says the hibah documents must be free of ambiguity and meet all requirements of Islamic law and existing regulations. 'It's always better for a hibah to be done in writing – rather than verbally – as written documents serve as strong proof of intention and mutual consent. 'Moreover, anyone planning to gift assets through hibah is encouraged to seek Syariah Court confirmation and prepare formal documentation. 'Confirmation from the Syariah Court (via a hibah confirmation order) certifies the validity of the hibah under Islamic law and makes it binding on other heirs. 'It's also advisable for the hibah giver to seek professional advice from a syariah lawyer, religious institution officer or estate planning consultant before and during the process,' he says, adding that the experts can ensure no technical aspects are overlooked, such as in the case of property, whether or not it is still under mortgage; or if there is a need to obtain bank consent; or for takaful hibah, whether or not the correct nomination procedures have been followed. Conditional hibah Al-Isra' Group associate manager Reefa Shahidah Mohd Razali, meanwhile, believes that the issue of takaful hibah being disputed in court would not arise if its implementation followed the existing legal framework under IFSA 2013. She explains that the hibah used in the current takaful industry is 'conditional hibah' – a direct gift made by the policyholder to the nominated recipient in the takaful certificate. Reefa Shahidah Mohd Razali 'There's no basis for accusing takaful agents of misleading clients because the implementation of this hibah is based on valid legal provisions under IFSA 2013, specifically Schedule 10, which outlines the hibah instrument. 'Hibah management in today's takaful differs from older plans that existed before IFSA 2013. 'Before the Act was enforced, most plans used the concept of 'wasi' (trustee), not absolute ownership-based hibah. 'That's why there was confusion in the past – it was not clearly stated whether the gift to heirs was through hibah or wasi. 'Today, it's clear. In current takaful plans, conditional hibah is valid and legally grounded,' she points out, adding that hibah nominations are valid and cannot be contested unless there is an element of fraud or breach of contract. 'Everything is based on the law. 'In fact, we encourage clients to fully understand the concept of conditional hibah before signing any policy.' — Bernama
