{"id":5461,"date":"2024-08-21T19:51:33","date_gmt":"2024-08-21T11:51:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?p=5461"},"modified":"2024-09-09T09:11:31","modified_gmt":"2024-09-09T01:11:31","slug":"tort-damages-trespass-to-land-balancing-the-scales-assessing-fair-damages-for-land-trespass","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/tort-damages-trespass-to-land-balancing-the-scales-assessing-fair-damages-for-land-trespass\/","title":{"rendered":"TORT &#8211; DAMAGES \u2013 TRESPASS TO LAND \u2013 BALANCING THE SCALES &#8211; ASSESSING FAIR DAMAGES FOR LAND TRESPASS"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Illustrative Scenario<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>X and Y own adjacent properties with a common border. X constructed buildings on his land, which encroached onto 0.28 hectares of Y&#8217;s land. The High Court ruled in favor of Y, finding X guilty of trespass and directing the Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) to assess the damages payable. During the assessment proceedings, both parties presented valuation reports. Y&#8217;s report claimed the market rental value of his entire land was RM8,200 per month, multiplied by 96 months. In contrast, X&#8217;s report assessed the market value of the trespassed portion at RM2,000 per month. X further argued that even if Y&#8217;s valuation was accepted, the damages should only amount to RM57,623.04, as it should be based on the 0.28 hectares of trespassed land, not the entire property.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Key Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Should the measure of damages be based on the loss of rent from the trespassed portion of the land?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Has Y proven the amount claimed as loss?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the absence of sufficient proof, should only nominal damages be awarded?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Can Y be compensated for the loss of rental for the entire land when the actual area trespassed is comparatively small?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Application to the Scenario<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>While X is obligated to pay a reasonable sum for the wrongful use of Y&#8217;s property, the burden of proof lies with Y to provide evidence of what that reasonable sum should be. If Y claims that he intended to rent out the land but was prevented from doing so due to the trespass, he must present evidence to establish that loss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Although the fact of loss is presumed in the tort of trespass, the amount of recoverable loss must be proven by Y.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>According to Y&#8217;s own valuation, the entire piece of land was valued at RM900,000.00.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The court is likely to determine that the rental amount of RM57,623, as suggested by X, is more reasonable compared to Y&#8217;s claim of RM782,200, especially given the overall land value of RM900,000.00.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Reference Cases<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Cottrill v Steyning and Littlehampton Building Society [1966] 2 All ER 295, QBD<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Amm a\/l Joy (suing as Chairman Committee Members of Wat Boonyaram) v Chuan Seng Sdn Bhd [2018] 5 MLJ 255<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Akitek Tenggara Sdn Bhd v Mid Valley City Sdn Bhd [2007] 5 MLJ 697; [2007] 6 CLJ 93<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Illustrative Scenario X and Y own adjacent properties with a common border. X constructed buildings on his land, which encroached onto 0.28 hectares of Y&#8217;s land. The High Court ruled in favor of Y, finding X guilty of trespass and directing the Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) to assess the damages payable. During the assessment proceedings, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5462,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1561,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5461","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-tort","category-updates"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5461"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5461"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5461\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5465,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5461\/revisions\/5465"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5461"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5461"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5461"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}