LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I

TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

1. With reference to relevant provisions of the National Land Code 2020, discuss the
main features of the Torrens system as found in West Malaysia.

2. Our courts often refer to the English land law in deciding land disputes despite
the express prohibition in section 6 of the Civil Law Act 1956. Discuss.

Section 3 vs Section 6 Civil Law Act

Interpretation of Section 6 -
o Prohibits only English Common Law, not equity
 Devi v Francis
 The Court referred to English cases
 Unregistered tenancy – not governed by the NLC
o Prohibits both Equity and Common Law
 UMBC v Pemungut
 Forfeitures – governed by the NLC
 No need for the Courts to introduce English Common Law
 Datin Sri Hajar v Murugasu
Section 206(3) NLC
o Templeton v Low Yat Holdings – Common law and Equity applies when
there is lacunae

 Section 6 prohibits importation of English land law in Malaysia

o Why some courts refer to English cases?
o Registrable interest
o Section 206(3)
 Example: A pay 10% to B, B ran away without registering the title
 Equity comes to help parties to resolve dispute – For A has
right in personam
 After registration, A has a right in rem
o Referring the English law on fixture.
 Goh Chong Hin [1924] – passed before the Civil Law Act
 By now, the law on fixture is no longer foreign law, it is a Malaysian
law, therefore Section 6 CLA is not applicable.
 Caveat
o Normally can lodge a caveat after paying 10% deposit for SPA Agreement

3. ‘Section 206(3) of the National Land Code 2020 is the basis of liberal
application of equity on land matters in Peninsular Malaysia.’

Discuss to what extent you agree/disagree with the above statement.

Section 4 Selangor Enactment – outside statute, null and void
o Haji Abdul Rahman v Mohamed Hassan
FMS Land Code
SIK C P 1
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

o Wilkins – Torren did not abrogate equity. Equity can be used when
necessary
NLC 2020
o Section 205 – Contractual obligation
o Section 206(3)
 Does not affect a valid contractual obligation
 Limitations:
 Valid contract
 Cannot defeat of the right of 3rd party
 Dealing must be recognize under NLC
Lian Keow
o Before and After registration

4. Comment on the judicial approaches to the scope and effect of ss 3 and 6 of the
Civil Law Act 1956 in respect of the applicability of English law on land matters
in Peninsular Malaysia.

5. Write a short note on the case of UMBC v Pemungut Hasil Tanah Kota Tinggi
[1984] 2 MLJ 87 (PC) and explain whether, assuming sub-section (3) of section
206 of the National Land Code 2020 is the basis for the application of English
rules of equity on land matters in Peninsular Malaysia, there will be any
difference on the decision of the said case.

6. Babu is a manufacturer of sewing machines and equipments and he also provides

services for their erection and installation. By a leasing agreement, Babu
supplied and installed 10 sewing machines to Tai Huat Sdn Bhd. The agreement,
inter alia, provides for a retention of title clause. The machines were affixed to
the floor to a factory belonging to Tai Huat Sdn Bhd by bolts. The factory is built
on a piece of land which was earlier charged to Kaya Bank.

Derek, the managing director of Tai Huat Sdn Bhd, bought 2 original paintings
worth RM1 million and RM888, 888 respectively and hung both paintings on the
wall of his office.

Tai Huat Sdn Bhd faced severe financial difficulties and defaulted on the loan
repayments to Kaya Bank. Kaya Bank has obtained an order for sale and wants to
know what items on the land form part of the land for the purposes of the auction
sale.

Advise Kaya Bank.

SIK C P 2
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

7. ‘Perhaps the true rule is, that articles not otherwise attached to the land than by
their own weight are not to be considered as part of the land, unless the
circumstances are such as to show that they were intended to be part of the land,
the onus of showing that they were so intended lying on those who assert that
they have ceased to be chattels, and that, on the contrary, an article which is
affixed to the land even slightly is to be considered as part of the land, unless the
circumstances are such as to show that it was intended all along to continue a
chattel, the onus lying on those who contend that it is a chattel.’ - per Blackburn J
in Holland v Hodgson L.R. 7 C.P. 328, 335.

Discuss the above quotation in the context of the Malaysian land law with
reference to the provisions in the National Land Code 2020 and decided cases.

8. ‘A registered proprietor of an alienated land has exclusive but not absolute rights over his
land under the National Land Code 2020.’ Discuss.

9. Discuss the extent of a landowner’s rights under the National Land Code 2020,
with regard to the following rights-

(i) right of air space

(ii) right of support of land

10. Beatrice is the owner of a piece of land located in Labu Manik, on which a
double-storey house stands. In 2012, Beatrice rented the house to Azman (tenant)
who is a farmer.

During his occupation on the said land, Azman had on his own expense built a
garage attached to the rear wall of the house to keep his agricultural tools and
fertilizer etc. The garage was made of aluminium walls and attap roofs supported
by wooden posts or pillars. The wooden posts or pillars were embedded into a
cement surface. Besides, Azman had also on his own expense built some wooden
cages to keep the poultry he reared. The cages were laid on the ground in the
compound.

In July 2015, Azman informed Beatrice of his intention to terminate the tenancy
agreement between them. Beatrice would like to know her rights, if any, over
each of the following-

(i) the garage and its contents

(ii) the wooden cages

Advise Beatrice.

SIK C P 3
 LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

Issue: Whether Beatrice has rights over the wooden cages.

SIK C P 4
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

11. Muthu is the registered proprietor of land known as Lot 88 in Kampung Aman,
Sepang. In May 2007, Along built a double-storey shop house on the land. At the
time of construction the adjacent land, i.e. Lot 89, was a vacant land. To
maximize the space, Along had the shop house built with its windows and the
edge of the roof protruding into Lot 89.

In September 2008, Hou Choy Kongsi bought Lot 89 and planned to construct a
ten- storey hotel thereon. However, the proposed construction work could not be
carried out due to the protruding windows and roof of Along’s shop house. It was
also discovered later that Along had caused to be inserted ground anchors into Lot
89 in carrying out the construction work earlier. The ground anchors were 10
metres below the ground of Lot 89. It was on this area where the ground anchors
were the proposed hotel will be built.

Hou Choy Kongsi requested Along to remove the protruding windows and roof
of his shop house as well as the ground anchors below Lot 89 so as to enable the
proposed construction work to be carried out. Along refused as his son Abeng, a
law student, told him about the Latin maxim cujus est solum ejus est usque ad
coelum et ad inferos (to whom belongs the soil, his it is, even to heaven, and to
the middle of the earth).

Upon his refusal, Hou Choy Kongsi has brought an action against Along. Advise
Along on the above matters.

12. Cahaya Sdn Bhd is the registered proprietor of a factory. Some air filters were
installed at the factory. These air filters were the subject of a lease agreement
between Cahaya Sdn Bhd and Klean Air Sdn Bhd made in 1999. The air filters
were custom-made for Cahaya Sdn Bhd and they were built into the building
structure of the factory.

Advise the parties in each of the separate and independent situations below-

a) To finance the purchase of the land on which the factory is built, Cahaya Sdn
Bhd took a loan from Money Bank in 1998. The loan was secured by a charge
over the land in favour of Money Bank. Cahaya Sdn Bhd defaulted in its
monthly repayment of the loan obtained from Money Bank and Money Bank
took possession of the factory. Klean Air Sdn Bhd intends to remove the air
filters from the factory. Would your advice differ if the charge was created in
2001, instead of 1998?

b) Cahaya Sdn Bhd defaulted in its monthly payment under the lease agreement
with Klean Air Sdn Bhd. Klean Air Sdn Bhd intends to remove the air filters
from the factory while Cahaya Sdn Bhd claims that the air filters have been
permanently fastened to the factory which is attached to the earth.
SIK C P 5
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

13.
a) Explain the differences between ‘sub-division’ and ‘partition’ of land.

b) Bujang is the registered proprietor of a piece of land, the area of which is 50

hectares. He intends to develop the land into a huge housing estate. However,
the category of land use imposed on the said land is ‘Agriculture’.

(i) Advise Bujang on the necessary procedure so that he could legally

do so and highlight the important conditions to be fulfilled by him.

(ii) How would your advice in (i) differ if Bujang would like to have
the said land sub-divided and only to develop a portion of the sub-
divided land into housing estate?

14.
a) Discuss the anomaly that arose between the Federal Court and the High Court
decisions in the case of Teh Bee v K Maruthamuthu [1977] 2 MLJ 17.

b) What is the significance of the case of Dr Ti Teow Siew & Ors v Pendafter
Geran- Geran Tanah Negeri Selangor [1982] 1 MLJ 38?

15.15.

Kanun Tanah Negara Borang 5EK

(Jadual Keempat Belas)

PAJAKAN MUKIM

No.99Hakmilik:
Pajakan selama 111berakhir pada 29 Disember
tahun, tempoh Cukai Tahunan:
2092. RM40.00

Negeri : PERAK

Daerah : MANJUNG

Bandar/Pekan/Mukim : MUKIM LUMUT

No. Lot : Lot 12345

SIK C P 6
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

Luas Lot : 1.294 HEKTAR

Kategori Penggunaan Tanah : Pertanian

No. Lembaran Piawai 1045

No. Pelan Diperakui : 76406

No. Fail : PT.MJG.A2/92/76-1(225)

Tanah yang diperihalkan di atas adalah dipegang untuk selama tempoh tahun di
atas oleh tuan punya pada masa namanya disebut dalam rekod ketuanpunyaan di
bawah, tertakluk kepada peruntukan-peruntukan Kanun Tanah Negara, kepada
kategori yag dinyatakan di atas dan kepada syarat-syarat nyata dan sekatan-sekatan
kepentingan yang dinyatakan di bawah, sebagai balasan bagi pembayaran cukai
tahunan yang sewajarnya.

Dengan perintah Pihak Berkuasa

Negeri Didaftarkan pada 14 Ogos

1997

T.M …..…………t.t.…………….

Pendaftar

Pelan tanah, bagi maksud pengenalan, adalah dikepilkan pada Borang B1.

SYARAT-SYARAT NYATA

Tanah ini hendaklah digunakan untuk tanaman dusun sahaja.

SEKATAN-SEKATAN
KEPENTINGAN

Tanah ini tidak boleh dipindahmilik atau dipajak melainkan dengan

kebenaran Menteri Besar.

Tarikh Mula-Mula Pemberimilikan 14 September 1993

SIK C P 7
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

No. Hakmilik asal (Tetap atau sementara) HSM 1459 Mukim Lumut

SIK C P 8
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

No. Hakmilik yang terdahulu daripada ini - (jika berlainan daripada di atas)

REKOD KETUANPUNYAAN

Chin Choy, ½ bahagian

No. KP: A1234567, Warganegara Malaysia

No. 1, Jalan 2, Taman Tiga, Batu Gajah, 31000 Perak.

Chin Chai, ½ bahagian

No. KP: A7654321, Warganegara Malaysia

No. 1, Jalan 2, Taman Tiga, Batu Gajah, 31000 Perak.

REKOD URUSAN

No Pers 1111/2000 Gadaian menjamin wang pokok

Oleh Chin Choy, No. KP: A1234567, ½

bahagian Chin Chai, No. KP: A7654321,

½ bahagian

kepada Prosperity Bank Berhad, No. Sykt: 1234-M

No. 122 & 123, Jalan Wang, Batu Gajah, 3100 Perak.

Didaftarkan pada 19 November 2000 jam 10:37:45 pagi

Suratkuasa Wakil: Jil 13 Fol 34

PERKARA LAIN YANG MELIBATKAN

HAKMILIK

With reference to the issue document of title above, answer the following questions-
a) Explain the legal position if the land, i.e. Lot 12345, is planted with only
rubber trees.

b) Assuming the Land Administrator has served a notice in Form 7B on Chin

Choy and Chin Chai, who else should be served with a copy of the said notice
SIK C P 9
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

and why?

SIK C P 10
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

c) Chin Choy and Chin Chai would like to build a factory for light industry on
Lot 12345. Is it possible for them to do so lawfully and how this may be
done?

d) Assuming Chin Choy and Chin Chai had executed and presented for
registration an instrument to transfer Lot 12345 to Muniandy without
applying for the approval from the Chief Minister. What is the legal position
of the purported transfer?

16. With reference to relevant statutory provisions, list down every disposal of land
that the State Authority is empowered to make under the National Land Code
2020 according to the types of land as follows:

a) State land
b) Alienated land
c) Mining land
d) Reserved land

17. Explain ‘alienation’. Discuss in what circumstances a piece of land which has
been alienated may revert to the State Authority.

18. Briefly explain the procedure to challenge the validity of forfeiture and the
possible grounds of the said challenge.

19. Explain in what circumstances a piece of alienated land may be liable to be

forfeited.

20. Amy would like to apply for a piece of land located in the foreshore to be
alienated to her so that she could build a house thereon. With reference to
relevant statutory provisions, advise her on each of the following questions.

a) Is it legally possible for the said land to be alienated to Amy? Why or why
not?

b) How would your answer in (a) be affected by the fact that Amy is a citizen of
Australia?

c) Assuming the answer to the question in (a) is positive, will Amy be able to
hold the land in perpetuity? Why or why not?

d) Assuming the answer to the question in (a) is positive, which title (either
SIK C P 11
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

Registry Title or Land Office title) will be issued?

SIK C P 12
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

21. Paru is the holder of a Temporary Occupation Licence in respect of a piece of

land, i.e. Lot 123. He comes to you seeking your advice on the validity of each of
the following transactions-

(i) An agreement whereby Paru lets a house on Lot 123 to one Kee.
(ii) An agreement whereby Paru sells a house on Lot 123 to one Saiful.

22. Discuss the legal position in each of the independent and separate situations
below-

a) Ali holds a Temporary Occupation Licence in respect of a piece of land.

During his occupation he built a house on the land. Before the expiry of the
said licence, Ali intends to sell the house to Bibi.

b) Caya applied for the alienation of a piece of land, Lot 123. Her application
was approved. However, it was discovered later that Lot 123 was previously
reserved for vegetable farms and there was no record of any revocation. How
would your discussion differ if Lot 123 constituted merely a tiny portion of
the reserved land?

c) Daya had been staying on a piece of vacant land for the past twenty years. The
land was never alienated to anyone. Daya fell the trees on the land and built a
house thereon. Recently, Daya received a letter from the Land Office
requesting him to vacate the land.

23. Zaid is the registered proprietor of land held under Lot 123. The category of land
use imposed on the title is ‘agricultural’. Zaid intends to develop the land for
industrial use. The authority has approved his application subject to a few
conditions, including payment of premium and tax on the change of the category
of land use. Zaid did not make the payment. He was later served with a notice
under section 128. Advise Zaid.

24. Ben, Kalai and Sara are co-proprietors of a piece of land (Lot 447) with Ben
holding 3/5 undivided share while Kalai and Sara holding 1/5 undivided shares
each. A misunderstanding arose among them and thus Ben would like to end the
co- proprietorship.

Advise Ben on the process by which he may do so. How would you advise Ben if
Kalai refuses to give consent to the process to be adopted by Ben?

25. Amir Khan agreed to buy a piece of land, Lot 111, from Tom Hang. Amir’s
solicitors conducted a private search at the land registry of Kuala Lumpur
which confirmed Tom as the registered proprietor of Lot 111 and Lot 111 is
SIK C P 13
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

free from encumbrances. A sale and purchase agreement was signed and Amir
then proceeded to obtain a loan from a bank to finance the purchase.
Eventually, the loan amount was disbursed to

SIK C P 14
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

Tom’s solicitors while the transfer and charge instruments were presented for
registration.
When Amir visited Lot 111, he met one Donny Yen, who claimed that he is the
true land owner. Amir’s solicitors immediately conducted an official search and
found that Donny Yen was the registered proprietor of Lot 111. Meanwhile,
Tom Hang has disappeared and was nowhere to be found.

Advise Amir Khan.

26. Explain the characteristics of an easement. Also, discuss how an easement may
be created over alienated land under the National Land Code 2020.

27. With reference to the relevant statutory provisions and case law, compare and
contrast am easement created over alienated land and a land administrator’s right
of way over an individual’s land.

28. There used to be a road from Cincin Mahal to Lembu Merayau known as Jalan
Besar across a piece of land (Lot 2424) located in Mukim Asam. The road was
built by Great Malaysia Estate (GME) in 1990 to transport oil palm fruits from
its estate in Cincin Mahal to Lembu Merayau. Since then it was also used by the
public to travel between Cincin Mahal and Lembu Merayau.

In 2007, Azmin was granted Lot 2424, free of any right of way. Azmin built a
wall of concretes to block Jalan Besar. GME approached Azmin and made an
agreement with him whereby GME was to pay him a monthly toll of RM900 for
the use of the road.

The payment of toll to Azmin in long term would be costly to GME. Advise
GME on the above matter. Explain how your advice may be affected if there is
an alternate route and -

(i) it is a road reserve which is still a hilly jungle.

(ii) it is a properly constructed public road but it is not as convenient as Jalan

Besar to GME.

29. With reference to statutory provisions and case law, explain the concept of
‘indefeasibility’ and exceptions to it.

30. Write a case note on each of the following cases and explain the significance of
each decision:
a) Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit [2001] 2 CLJ 133
SIK C P 15
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

b) Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San & Ors [2010] 2 CLJ 269

SIK C P 16
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

31. Aya was the registered proprietor of a piece of land located in Setapak. She has
the original issue document of title for the land with her at all time. Unknown to
Aya, her sister Caya falsified a power of attorney purportedly granted by Aya
and obtained a new computerized title for the said land registered in Aya’s name.
By the forged power of attorney and the new computerized title, Caya entered
into a sale and purchase agreement with Ben. The transfer in favour of Ben was
registered. Ben later sold and transferred the land to Din who eventually sold the
same to Emily. To finance her purchase of the said land, Emily obtained a loan
from Big Bank and charged the land to the latter. Aya discovered recently that
the land is registered in the name of Emily. Advise Aya.

32. Brandon was the registered proprietor of a piece of land in Kuala Lumpur.
Without his knowledge, his worker Derek impersonated as him and transferred
the land to Raya by forging Brandon’s signature. Raya eventually sold the land
to Kaya. To finance his purchase of the land, Kaya obtained a loan from Big
Bank and charged the land to the bank. Both memorandum of transfer and charge
in favour of the bank were registered on the same day. When Kaya defaulted in
payment Big Bank obtained an order for sale of the land. Brandon found out that
the land was registered in the name of Kaya when he saw the notice of auction.
Advise Brandon.

33. Taib obtained the title document of a piece of land belonging to Susil through
fraudulent means. He did so by procuring a woman to impersonate Susil and to
execute a transfer of the land to himself. Taib immediately executed a charge in
favour of Big Bank to secure an overdraft facility granted to him. Big Bank
honestly believed that Taib was the true land owner. The transfer and charge
were eventually registered.

When Taib failed to pay for the overdraft facility, Big Bank applied for, and the
court granted, an order for sale of the land. At this time, Susil discovered that her
land had been transferred to Taib and lodged a police report straightaway. Taib
absconded and has not since been heard of. Susil applied to the Registrar who
then entered a registrar’s caveat against the land to prevent the sale by Big Bank.

Advise Big Bank whether its interest under the charge is indefeasible.

34. Compulsory acquisition of land may be done only with adequate compensation.
Discuss and comment on the approach in determining an adequate compensation
under the Land Acquisition Act 1960.

35. It is said that compulsory acquisition may be done only if the land is required for
public purpose. With reference to the relevant statutory provisions and case law,
discuss the legal position of the public purpose rule for compulsory acquisition
in Malaysia.

SIK C P 17
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

36. Section 3 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 provides as follows:

SIK C P 18
LIA2005/LXEB2112 LAND LAW I
TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

‘The State Authority may acquire any land which is needed-

(a) for any public purpose;
(b) by any person or corporation for any purpose which in the
opinion of the State Authority is beneficial to the economic
development of Malaysia or any part thereof or to the public
generally or any class of the public; or
(c) for the purpose of mining or for residential, agricultural,
commercial, industrial or recreational purposes or any
combination of such purposes.’

Section 8(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 states that when the State
Authority decides that any land is needed for any of the purposes stated in
section 3, a declaration in Form D shall be published in the Gazette while section
8(3) provides that a declaration in Form D shall be the conclusive evidence that
the land concerned is needed for the specified purposes.

Comment on the purpose requirement for compulsory acquisition of land in

Malaysia. Also discuss whether you agree with the claim that it is impossible to
challenge compulsory acquisition of land on the ground that it is not done for
public purpose in view of the above provisions in the Land Acquisition Act
1960.

SIK C P 19