1. ) ANG BEE CHIN 2. ) NG SWEE KIM 3. ) LEE SOO YING 4. ) CHING THONG LOO 5. ) NG LAI HENG 6. ) OOI SHU XIN 7. ) LOW SIEW EAN 8. ) ANG POH HONG 9. ) LEE TEIK MENG 10. ) LEE JIANG HENG 11. ) LIM TENG HO 12. ) KHOR BEE FUNG 13. ) SOON CHOON HOCK 14. ) CHEW GUEK BEE 15. ) ALEXANDER LIM AIK BENG 16. ) LIM YEW WAN AMELIA 17. ) DON SOH SENG HO 18. ) LIM TENG LEONG 19. ) MELVIN ANG WEI JINN 20. ) SEOW GIM SHEN 21. ) LEE KEAN BOON 22. ) NG CHOY YIM 23. ) NG WAI FERNG 24. ) CHEAH GIM SUN 25. ) TEH MEH...

pa-22ncvc-49-03-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 20 February 2025 • PA-22NCvC-49-03/2021

Catchwords

The requirement for compliance is contained in the SPA. Therefore, the action for failure to comply with the said statute is still due to the SPA. The Court is of the opinion that the Plaintiffs is allowed to bring this action for the said non-compliance if the provision was not expressly stated in the agreement or was not part of the said agreement. Without the SPA, the Plaintiffs would not have had the legal capacity to file a civil lawsuit against the Defendants under Regulation 11 and Schedule G of the Housing Development (Licensing & Control) Regulations 1989.

Practice Areas

The requirement for compliance is contained in the SPA. Therefore, the action for failure to comply with the said statute is still due to the SPA. The Court is of the opinion that the Plaintiffs is allowed to bring this action for the said non-compliance if the provision was not expressly stated in the agreement or was not part of the said agreement. Without the SPA, the Plaintiffs would not have had the legal capacity to file a civil lawsuit against the Defendants under Regulation 11 and Schedule G of the Housing Development (Licensing & Control) Regulations 1989.

Judges (1)

Azizan bin Md. Arshad Delivered

Parties (41)

HENG HONG ENTERPRISE Sdn Bhd Plaintiff K-ASIA HOLDINGS Sdn Bhd Defendant KEMUNING SETIA Sdn Bhd Defendant Alexander Lim Aik Beng Plaintiff Ang Bee Chin Plaintiff Ang Poh Hong Plaintiff Ch'ng Chooi Kim Plaintiff Cheah Gim Sun Plaintiff Chew Guek Bee Plaintiff Ching Thong Loo Plaintiff Don Soh Seng Ho Plaintiff Fang Siew Hong Plaintiff Khor Bee Fung Plaintiff Lee Jiang Heng Plaintiff Lee Kean Boon Plaintiff Lee Soo Ying Plaintiff Lee Teik Meng Plaintiff Leong Chin Soon Plaintiff Lim Ai Chen Plaintiff Lim Chin Joo Plaintiff Lim Lay Wah Plaintiff Lim Teng Ho Plaintiff Lim Teng Leong Plaintiff Lim Yew Wan Amelia Plaintiff Low Siew Ean Plaintiff Marjorie Chan Poh Lian Plaintiff Melvin Ang Wei Jinn Plaintiff Ng Choy Yim Plaintiff Ng Lai Heng Plaintiff Ng Swee Kim Plaintiff Ng Wai Ferng Plaintiff Ooi Cheng Hoe Plaintiff Ooi Lai Hock Plaintiff Ooi Shu Xin Plaintiff Seow Gim Shen Plaintiff Soon Choon Hock Plaintiff Tan Phaik See Plaintiff Teh Meh Lee Plaintiff Yeap Hai Choe Plaintiff Yeoh Chee Hou Plaintiff Yeoh Oon Leong Plaintiff

Case Significance

1. ) ANG BEE CHIN 2. ) NG SWEE KIM 3. ) LEE SOO YING 4. ) CHING THONG LOO 5. ... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated February 20, 2025 (citation: pa-22ncvc-49-03-2021). The case was decided by Azizan bin Md. Arshad.

What was the outcome of 1. ) ANG BEE CHIN 2. ) NG SWEE KIM 3. ) LEE SOO YING 4. ) CHING THONG LOO 5. ...?

1. ) ANG BEE CHIN 2. ) NG SWEE KIM 3. ) LEE SOO YING 4. ) CHING THONG LOO 5. ... is a High Court decision dated February 20, 2025. The case was heard by Azizan bin Md. Arshad. See the full judgment for details.