C

Chee Hoe & Associates

4 cases · 6 lawyers

Contact Information

📍 LEVEL 1, CONSERVATORY, NO. 7, LORONG TRAVERS, BUKIT PERSEKUTUAN
📠 03-22011280

About Chee Hoe & Associates

Chee Hoe & Associates has appeared in 4 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning January 2025 to February 2026. Case appearances span the Court of Appeal (4). Role breakdown: counsel for appellant (4). The firm is located at LEVEL 1, CONSERVATORY, NO. 7, LORONG TRAVERS, BUKIT PERSEKUTUAN, phone: 017-7773224, email: liti@cheehoe.com.

4
Cases
6
Lawyers (in cases)
4
Appearances

How many cases has Chee Hoe & Associates handled?

Chee Hoe & Associates has appeared in 4 published judgments from January 2025 to February 2026. Appearances span the Court of Appeal (4).

Practice Areas (from case appearances)

This is an appeal concerning a dispute over the rates of maintenance charges imposed on car parks in a mixed commercial development project known as PD1 Complex. The High Court decided in favour of the Respondent, but the Appellant appealed, contending the charges were unfair and sought different rates based on usage. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Appellant's computation arbitrary and a collateral attempt to redress share unit inequities. The court upheld the High Court's decision, and the Appellant must pay RM 40,000 to the Respondent. 1 This is an appeal by the Appellant / Plaintiff against the decision of the High Court dated 24.09.2024 in dismissing the Plaintiff’s application with costs of RM7,000.00 vide Enclosure 311 to stay the High Court Judgment dated 26.06.2024 pending the disposal of the Appellant’s Civil Appeal No. P-02(NCvC)(W)-1305-07/2024 1 legal questions concerning the validity of a bifurcated management structure in a mixed development under the Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007 (“BCPA 2007”) and the Strata Management Act 2013 (“SMA 2013”). 1 whether the developer and the commercial parcel owners were legally entitled to institute a regime of separate management and maintenance of the commercial parcels and the common property within the commercial component, thereby confining the Joint Management Body (“JMB”) to the management of only the residential parcels and the common property appurtenant thereto. 1 Court to determine the consequences of such arrangements should the resolutions passed at the first annual general meeting be found ultra vires and void, specifically, whether the JMB, is entitled to demand the surrender and handover of the commercial common property, and to recover arrears of maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions retrospectively from the developer’s management period through to the present JMB management period. 1 whether residential parcel owners, who had paid charges imposed pursuant to the impugned resolutions, may seek refunds of the sums paid, and whether the Court may instead order that such payments be credited or adjusted against lawfully determined charges to be fixed at a proper general meeting to be convened by the JMB. 1 statutory framework governing common property, the indivisibility of management responsibilities, and the legal effect of resolutions that purport to depart from the scheme mandated by the BCPA 2007 and SMA 2013. 1 The appeal concerns voting rights under the Strata Management Act 2013, where the Court of Appeal held that parcel owners in arrears cannot vote unless disputes over the arrears are resolved through a full trial, directing the case to proceed as a writ action. 1

Lawyers (6)

Cases (4)