Share
- The court ruled the 26 questions of law posed by the company failed to meet the threshold for the merits of the appeal to be heard, according to Chief Judge of Malaya (CJM) Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim. She sat with Federal Court judge Datuk Hanipah Farikullah and Court of Appeal judge Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali.
PUTRAJAYA (Nov 13): Semantan Estate (1952) Sdn Bhd has lost its appeal over the Court of Appeal decision on June 24, upholding a ruling that prevents its registration of the prime "Duta Enclave" land currently owned by the government and the physical handover of the land to the company.
A three-member Federal Court bench on Thursday unanimously dismissed Semantan Estate's two appeals.
This means that the Court of Appeal’s decision remains in effect: the federal government still owns the land and the buildings, but the High Court will decide how much compensation should be paid.
The court ruled the 26 questions of law posed by the company failed to meet the threshold for the merits of the appeal to be heard, according to Chief Judge of Malaya (CJM) Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim. She sat with Federal Court judge Datuk Hanipah Farikullah and Court of Appeal judge Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali.
Hasnah delivered the broad grounds of the decision while Hanipah wrote the supporting grounds in the unanimous decision.
This marked one of the final rulings for both Hasnah and Hanipah, who are retiring this month.
Hasnah in her broad grounds said that the 2009 High Court order by Judicial Commissioner Zura Yahya did not include any enforceable requirement to transfer the land.
She said this means the land cannot be taken back from the government, and compensation should be based on the 1956 acquisition.
Hasnah added that requesting a court order to force the land’s handover or register it back to Semantan Estate had no legal basis and no other legal remedy can replace it.
“The bench is of a considered opinion as the application for leave (permission) does not meet the threshold under Sections 96A and 96B of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 for the statutory test for leave to appeal to be granted.”
Hasnah said the case depends on the facts because the company did not immediately seek to take over the land or register it after Zura’s 2009 decision.
“They only sought the transfer of registrable interests in 2017, eight years after the 2009 order was made. This case is fact-centric and this bench does not find that it raises constitutional questions of importance.
“The 2009 High Court order is clear. For these reasons, both appeals are dismissed,” Hasnah, the retiring CJM, said.
In the 2009 judgement by Zura, the court ruled that the government had trespassed on and illegally acquired the 263.272-acre Duta enclave, which now contains many government buildings, including the National Archives, Malaysian Examination Syndicate, Inland Revenue Board headquarters, Kuala Lumpur Shariah Court, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Academy, and the main road and interchange on Jalan Duta.
Supporting judgement by Hanipah
Hanipah agreed that the 2009 High Court judgement only said Semantan Estate keeps beneficial interests in the land, not ownership transfer. She said the land is registered under the federal government’s name, so the current appeal contradicts the 2009 ruling.
“This follows that the High Court only found that Semantan Estate retains the beneficial interests. The Court of Appeal was correct in deciding that there are no registrable interests. In the course of my research, as there is no order for the title to be registered, it therefore, and cannot be registrable interests for the land title to be registered back to Semantan under the National Land Code,” she said.
With no ownership rights to register, she said the case doesn’t raise new legal issues about registered and beneficial ownership. Hanipah added, “There’s no important public matter for this court to consider further.”
In civil cases at the apex court, permission must be granted for an appeal to be heard if it involves new legal issues or matters of public importance.
The origins of this dispute trace back to 1956, when the government took possession of the 263.272-acre land in Bukit Semantan, Kuala Lumpur, for RM1.325 million.
The land was subsequently developed into the prestigious Duta Enclave, which now houses government buildings, facilities, and a major system of roads. Semantan Estate then filed a suit over the case in 2003, alleging that the compulsory land acquisition was illegal because it was conducted without following the proper legal procedures and amounted to trespassing.
Semantan Estate was represented by Datuk Dr Cyrus Das, Ira Biswas and Alexie Ng Ying Ching, while senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan and Nurhafizza Azizan appeared for the federal government and other respondents.
Hasnah and the court made no decision on legal costs and ordered that the High Court will assess Semantan Estate’s compensation at 1956 market rates on Nov 17 before judge Roslan Mat Nor.
For mesne profits—compensation for loss of use of property—Semantan Estate values the damages at RM5 billion to RM12 billion, while government valuers estimate RM290 million.
COA: Govt cannot return Semantan Estate land after 70 years of development
Datuk Lee Swee Seng, now a Federal Court judge, in reading out the Court of Appeal's unanimous decision, said the words in the two laws—the Specific Relief Act 1950 and the Government Proceedings Act 1956—meant exactly what they say, that there is a prohibition, and that no order is to be made for the recovery of the land.
“This is to ensure a public authority can perform its duty and obligation. Even if the government is supposed to pay, the acquisition is considered to be lawful,” Lee said.
Lee further described that the consequence would be “horrendous” if an order was issued to return the land to Semantan Estate after nearly 70 years. He also pointed out that when the government took possession of the plot in December 1956, the area only consisted of old rubber trees.
“Now, it is part of a fully developed township with various government buildings housing various facilities that serve the public...there is also a system of roads, highways and flyovers serving the public and connecting it with the surrounding areas, all developed and continue to be developed,” Lee noted.
Chief Justice Datuk Seri Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, who was on the Court of Appeal bench with Lee, also wrote a supporting judgement.
As Penang girds itself towards the last lap of its Penang2030 vision, check out how the residential segment is keeping pace in EdgeProp’s special report: PENANG Investing Towards 2030.
