USE OF STRATA PROPERTY FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL PURPOSE

Q: I own several units of condominium. Can I do short term rental via booking platforms such as Airbnb, klsuites, booking.com, agoda.com?

A:

Short-term rental is permissible only if the house rules of your condominium do not prohibit it.
In Innab Salil & Ors v Verve Suites Mont’ Kiara Management Corp, it was decided that management corporations and joint management bodies (JMBs) could ban short-term rentals through their own house rules.

Q: Isn’t that prohibition of short-term rentals a violation of my right as owner of my unit?

A:

The Federal Court’s decision in Innab Salil reinforces the entitlement of management corporations and bodies under the Strata Management Act 2013 (“SMA 2013”) to create by-laws restricting the engagement in short-term rentals of the owner’s units.
Management bodies can now create by-laws with the intention of curbing short-term rentals in the buildings under its management.

Q: If the State Authority permits the use of the land of which the building is built for commercial purposes, can the House Rules prohibit the owners from doing short-term rental. Are those House Rules valid?

A:

Even if the building is built on a land slated for commercial use, the Management Corporation or bodies established under the SMA 2013 may via AGM pass by-laws prohibiting use of the unit for short-term rental purpose.

Q: What if I ignore the house rules of the condominium’s management and continue to rent out my unit to short-term renters?

A: The Management Corporations, JMB or developer may obtain an injunction restraining you from so doing. They may also via section 32(3)(i) of SMA 2013 imposes fine of not exceeding RM200 for breach of the by-laws.

Q: What is the duration of short-term rentals?

A: The duration of short-term rentals are typically a few nights or weeks.

Q: What is the advice for someone who intends to invest in property for short-term rental business purpose?

A: Homebuyers who intends to invest in short-term rental business should take necessary steps to ensure the management of the property allows such rental to begin with.

Sorotan Terkini

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

BREACH OF CONTRACT – FORCE MAJEURE – FORCE MAJEURE UNPACKED: WHEN ‘REASONABLE ENDEAVOURS’ DON’T BEND CONTRACT TERMS

The UK Supreme Court clarified the limits of force majeure clauses, ruling that “reasonable endeavours” do not require a party to accept alternative performance outside the agreed contract terms. This decision emphasizes that force majeure clauses are meant to uphold, not alter, original obligations – even in unexpected circumstances. The case serves as a reminder for businesses to define alternative options explicitly within their contracts if flexibility is desired.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

NEGLIGENCE – MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE – HOSPITAL ACCOUNTABILITY REINFORCED: COURT UPHOLDS NON-DELEGABLE DUTY IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

In a landmark ruling, the court reinforced the hospital’s non-delegable duty of care, holding that even when services are outsourced to independent contractors, the hospital remains accountable for patient welfare. This decision emphasizes that vulnerable patients, reliant on medical institutions, must be safeguarded against harm caused by third-party providers. The ruling ultimately rejected the hospital’s defense of independence for contracted consultants, underscoring a high standard of duty owed to patients.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

CONTRACTS – CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF GOODS FOB – REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN BACK-TO-BACK CONTRACTS – COURT DEFINES LIMITS ON LIABILITY

In a complex dispute involving back-to-back contracts, the court clarified the boundaries for assessing damages, emphasizing that a chain of contracts does not automatically ensure liability passes through. Although substantial losses resulted from delays and disruption, the court highlighted the importance of the remoteness of damages, noting that each contract’s unique terms ultimately limited liability. This decision emphasise the need for parties in chain contracts to carefully define indemnity and liability provisions, as damages are assessed based on foreseeability rather than simply the structure of linked agreements.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

TORT – BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY – COURT CRACKS DOWN ON INSIDER LEAKS AND CORPORATE CONSPIRACY

In a recent ruling on corporate confidentiality, the court held two former employees liable for disclosing sensitive business information to a competitor, deeming it a breach of both employment contracts and fiduciary duties. This case highlights the serious consequences of unauthorized sharing of proprietary data and reinforces that such disclosures can lead to substantial legal and financial repercussions, even for the receiving parties if they knowingly benefit from confidential information.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

PROPERTY LAW – CLAIMING OWNERSHIP: COURT UPHOLDS LEGAL TITLE AND DISMISSES CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST IN PROPERTY DISPUTE

In a recent property dispute, the court dismissed a claim for a constructive trust over property, underscoring that such a trust requires solid evidence of unfair conduct or fraud. Without sufficient proof of ownership.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

MY

× Hubungi Kami