Summary and Facts
Suntharalingam a/l V Veluppillai & Ors v Icon City JMB & Ors [2026] 10 MLJ 772 concerned parcel owners who challenged a joint management body for imposing different maintenance-charge rates on different components of a stratified mixed development. They contended the differentiated rates were ultra vires the Strata Management Act 2013 and that a single uniform rate was required.
Legal Issues
Whether the joint management body was legally required to impose a single uniform rate of maintenance charges on all parcels regardless of component type.
Whether differentiated charges tied to the exclusive use of Limited Common Property were just and equitable and within the Act.
High Court’s Findings
Menara Rajawali was distinguishable - it involved a single-building development with no designation of Limited Common Property, unlike the stratified mixed development here.
Icon City comprised ten distinct components, with Limited Common Property allocated by component and exclusive use granted to particular parcels.
Where facilities are differentiated by component and allocated for exclusive use, the Strata Management Act 2013 does not compel a single uniform rate of maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions.
Differentiated charges tied to the exclusive use and enjoyment of Limited Common Property could be just and equitable within the meaning of the Act.
The joint management body had acted within its powers and the parcel owners' application was dismissed.
Practical Implications
In mixed developments with Limited Common Property, management bodies may lawfully set differentiated maintenance rates that reflect exclusive use and benefit.
The 'single uniform rate' proposition in Menara Rajawali is confined to its facts and does not apply where components and exclusive facilities are properly designated.
Management bodies should document the basis for differentiated charges, by special resolution and by reference to the allocation of Limited Common Property, to withstand challenge.