Navigating Property Possession Standards in Malaysian Real Estate Law
- Vacant Possession Delivery Standards in Malaysia:
Under the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 (HDR 1989), implemented via Section 24 of the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 (HDA 1966), the sale contract is outlined in Schedules G or H of HDR 1989. If a developer fails to hand over vacant possession within the agreed timeframe in the Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA), the purchaser is entitled to claim liquidated ascertained damages (LAD). Notably, a developer’s obligation to compensate the purchaser persists even if vacant possession is delivered within the contractual timeline, but not in the agreed manner. - Case Study: Incomplete Utilities in Delivered Property:
Consider the case of ‘X’, who purchased a landed property. The property was handed over within the SPA’s specified timeframe, but without electricity and water connections. In this scenario, the developer’s argument that ‘X’ incurred no losses due to timely delivery is invalid. Consequently, ‘X’ is justified in claiming compensatory damages from the developer for violating Clause 27.. - Case Study: Incomplete Utilities in Delivered Property:
Consider the case of ‘X’, who purchased a landed property. The property was handed over within the SPA’s specified timeframe, but without electricity and water connections. In this scenario, the developer’s argument that ‘X’ incurred no losses due to timely delivery is invalid. Consequently, ‘X’ is justified in claiming compensatory damages from the developer for violating Clause 27..
Case Study: Incomplete Utilities in Delivered Property
Consider the case of ‘X’, who purchased a landed property. The property was handed over within the SPA’s specified timeframe, but without electricity and water connections. In this scenario, the developer’s argument that ‘X’ incurred no losses due to timely delivery is invalid. Consequently, ‘X’ is justified in claiming compensatory damages from the developer for violating Clause 27..