Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

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.

Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

REGULATIONS – GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE (GATT 1947 ) – ARTICLE I

This legal update explores key provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947), focusing on Article I (Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment), Article II (Schedules of Concessions), Article XX (General Exceptions), and Article XXI (Security Exceptions). Article I mandates that any trade advantage granted by one contracting party to another must be extended unconditionally to all other parties. Article II ensures that imported goods from contracting parties receive treatment no less favourable than that outlined in agreed schedules, while also regulating permissible taxes and charges. Articles XX and XXI provide exceptions for measures necessary to protect public morals, health, security interests, and compliance with domestic laws. The provisions reflect the foundational principles of non-discrimination, transparency, and fair trade, while allowing for limited, well-defined exceptions. This summary is intended to provide a concise reference for businesses and legal practitioners involved in international trade law.

Read More »
3 4 月 ,2025 尚無留言

ROAD ACCIDENT – INSURANCE COMPANY STRIKES BACK: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS ROAD ACCIDENT CLAIM

When a motorcyclist claimed he was knocked down in an accident, the Sessions Court ruled in his favor, holding the other rider fully liable. But the insurance company wasn’t convinced. They appealed, arguing that there was no proof of a collision and even raised suspicions of fraud. The High Court took a closer look – and in a dramatic turn, overturned the decision, dismissed the claim, and awarded RM60,000 in costs to the insurer. This case is a stark reminder that in court, assumptions don’t win cases – evidence does.

Read More »
24 2 月 ,2025 尚無留言

CHARTERPARTY – LIEN ON SUB-FREIGHTS: CLARIFYING OWNERS’ RIGHTS AGAINST SUB-CHARTERERS

In Marchand Navigation Co v Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd and Anor [2025] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 92, the Singapore High Court upheld the owners’ right to enforce a lien on sub-freights under Clause 18 of the NYPE 1946 charterparty, ruling that the phrase ‘any amounts due under this charter’ was broad enough to cover unpaid bunker costs. Despite an arbitration clause between the owners and charterers, the sub-charterer was obligated to honor the lien, as it was not a party to the arbitration agreement. This decision reinforces that a properly exercised lien on sub-freights can be an effective tool for owners to recover unpaid sums, even in the presence of disputes between charterers and sub-charterers.

Read More »
24 2 月 ,2025 尚無留言

SHIP SALE – LOSING THE DEAL, LOSING THE DAMAGES? THE LILA LISBON CASE AND THE LIMITS OF MARKET LOSS RECOVERY

In “The Lila Lisbon” [2025] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 101, the court ruled that a buyer cancelling under Clause 14 of the Norwegian Salesform Memorandum of Agreement is not automatically entitled to loss of bargain damages unless the seller is in repudiatory breach. The case clarifies that failing to deliver by the cancellation date does not constitute non-delivery under the English Sale of Goods Act 1979, as the clause grants the buyer a discretionary right rather than imposing a firm obligation on the seller. This decision highlights the importance of precise contract drafting, particularly in ship sale agreements, where buyers must ensure that compensation for market loss is explicitly provided for.

Read More »
24 2 月 ,2025 尚無留言

CRIMINAL – KIDNAPPING – NO ESCAPE FROM JUSTICE: COURT UPHOLDS LIFE SENTENCE IN HIGH-PROFILE KIDNAPPING CASE

A 10-year-old child was abducted outside a tuition center, held captive, and released only after a RM1.75 million ransom was paid. The appellants were arrested following investigations, with their statements leading to the recovery of a portion of the ransom money. Despite denying involvement, they were convicted under the Kidnapping Act 1961 and sentenced to life imprisonment and ten strokes of the whip. Their appeal challenged the identification process, the validity of the charge, and the admissibility of evidence, but the court found the prosecution’s case to be strong, ruling that the appellants had acted in furtherance of a common intention and were equally liable for the crime.

Read More »
24 2 月 ,2025 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们