Federal Court upholds jurisdiction of Homebuyer Claims Tribunal to hear split claims for distinct matters

In Remeggious Krishnan v SKS Southern Sdn Bhd (dahulu dikenali sebagai MB Builders Sdn Bhd) [2023] 1 LNS 362, the Federal Court held that the Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims (‘Tribunal’) has jurisdiction to hear two separate claims for different and distinct matters in respect of the same property, where the total amount of dispute exceeds the Tribunal’s jurisdiction of RM50,000.
 
Relevant facts
 
The respondent is the developer of a residential project known as Sky Habitat @ Meldrum Hill, Johor Bahru (‘Project’).
 
The appellant is the purchaser of an apartment unit of the Project. The appellant filed with the Tribunal a “Non-Technical Claim” for the respondent’s breach of the manner of delivery of vacant possession, and a “Technical Claim” for the respondent’s failure to provide adequate ceiling height and protruding beams and pillars. Each claim did not exceed the Tribunal’s monetary jurisdiction of RM50,000 but the total amount of the two claims exceeded the said sum of RM50,000.
 
The decision of the Tribunal and the High Court
 
The Tribunal heard the Non-Technical Claim and granted damages to the appellant.
 
Aggrieved with the Tribunal’s award, the respondent sought an order of certiorari at the High Court to quash the Tribunal’s decision, contending among others that the appellant had filed two separate claims with the Tribunal contrary to sections 16M(1) and 16Q of the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 (‘HDA').
 
The High Court held that the split claims were for different matters, and dismissed the respondent’s application.
 
The decision of the Court of Appeal
 
Dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision, the respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal.
 
The Court of Appeal held that there was no prohibition against filing of split claims, provided that their total amount remained within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. According to the Court of Appeal, the two split claims totalling above RM50,000.00 were clearly beyond the Tribunal’s jurisdiction; hence the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. Accordingly, the High Court’s decision was set aside, and an order for certiorari was issued to quash the Tribunal’s award.
 
The issue before the Federal Court
 
The appellant obtained leave to appeal to the Federal Court. One of the questions of law posed to the Federal Court was whether in view of sections 16M and 16Q of the HDA, the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear two separate claims in respect of the same property where the total amount of dispute of the two claims exceeds the Tribunal’s monetary jurisdiction of RM50,000.
 
Reinstatement of High Court’s Decision by Federal Court
 
The Federal Court reiterated that the HDA was enacted as a piece of social legislation to protect house buyers. Hence, it is imperative that sections 16M and 16Q of the HDA be interpreted in such a way as to provide protection of house buyers in keeping with the intention of Parliament.
 
Section 16M(1) of the HDA provides that “… the Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to determine a claim where the total amount in respect of which an award of the Tribunal is sought does not exceed fifty thousand ringgit”. The Federal Court noted that the words “a claim” and not “all the claims” were used in this provision.
 
Meanwhile, section 16Q of the HDA stipulates that “Claims may not be split, nor more than one claim brought, in respect of the same matter against the same party for the purpose of bringing it within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal”. The Federal Court noted that the word “matter” instead of “property” or “housing accommodation” was used in this provision.
 
In view thereof, the Federal Court took the view that “the same matter” could only mean the same issue or type of claim, and not the same property. As long as each of the appellant’s claims was in respect of different and distinct matters, and did not exceed the Tribunal’s monetary jurisdiction, the appellant was not in violation of section 16M of the HDA. Hence, the Federal Court answered the question of law in the affirmative, set aside the order of the Court of Appeal and restored the order of the High Court.
 
Comments
 
This Federal Court decision clarifies that a house buyer may lodge with the Tribunal separate claims for different matters in respect of the same property, so long as each claim does not exceed the Tribunal’s jurisdiction of RM50,000.
 
Case note by Jesy Ooi (Partner) and Engy Tan (Senior Associate) of the Real Estate Practice of Skrine.
 

This alert contains general information only. It does not constitute legal advice nor an expression of legal opinion and should not be relied upon as such. For further information, kindly contact skrine@skrine.com.