INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA
SEMESTER I, 2011/2012 SESSION
AHMAD IBRAHIM KULLIYYAH OF LAWS
Programme : Bachelor of Laws Level of : Third
Reading Time : 9.00 a.m. – 9.15 a.m. Date : 11.01.2012
Duration : ( 15 minutes )
Answering Time : 9.15 a.m. – 12.15 p.m. Section(s) : All Sections
Duration ( 3 hours )
Course Title : Land Law II Course Code : LAW 3111
This Question Paper Consists of 9 Printed Pages With 8 Questions.
INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES
DO NOT OPEN UNTIL YOU ARE ASKED TO DO SO.
Answer FOUR (4) Questions Only.
National Land Code 1965
Compilation of land Law Statutes
Any form of cheating or attempt to cheat is a serious
offence which may lead to dismissal
Statutes should be free from any form of annotation.
In 2007, Faiq agreed to buy a piece of land from Kenaiki. In 2009, Kenaiki however, sold
and transferred the land to Salaman who successfully registered the land in his name. In
2010, Faiq entered a caveat on the said land and in September of the same year brought
an action in the High Court against Kenaiki for specific performance. Later, Faiq
amended his action by adding Salaman as a party to the suit and alleged that the transfer
was effected through fraud as Salaman is aware of the previous agreement. Meanwhile,
Salaman succeeded in removing the caveat entered by Faiq since he wanted to charge the
land to Sudirman Sdn. Bhd.
Discuss and advise Faiq who now wants to enter a second caveat since the issue was not
resolved. Support your answer with reference to decided cases and statutory provisions.
Mr. Abo, the registered proprietor of a plot of land, intends to develop the land into a
business center. He approached BS Bank for a loan and the Bank readily agreed to give
the loan on the understanding that a lien is to be created over the said land. The
agreement was made and Abo deposited the issue document of title of his land with the
Bank in return for the said loan. A few months later, before BS Bank could enter the lien-
holder’s caveat, Abo who was badly in need of money, obtained a further loan from
Commercial Bank in return for creating a charge over the same land. He approached BS
Bank for the issue document of title under the pretext that he was going to take it to the
Registrar to correct the land boundary. He successfully obtained the issue document of
title and gave it to Tan Commercial Bank to create a charge on the land. Now, BS Bank
requests the return of the issue document of title to enable it enter lien-holder’s caveat.
Abo refused to do so, claiming that BS Bank has since lost its chance to enter the lien-
holder’s caveat in due time and that the handing over of the issue document of title by BS
Bank indicates that it had already relinquished its right over the lien that has been lost by
BS Bank’s voluntary action.
Advise the parties with reference to decided cases.
Khalid is the registered proprietor of a piece of land in Kuala Lumpur. He wants to
develop the same land into a multi-storey building comprising of a number of shop lots
and living apartments. Since he is in need of money, he approached Bank Simpanan for a
loan of RM5 million on the security of a charge over Khalid’s land. The transaction was
completed and in February 20, 2008 Bank Simpanan successfully registered a first legal
charge. In July 2008, Khalid entered into a second charge over the same land with
Citibank to secure the repayment of RM3 million. Citibank, however, agreed to the
charge on condition that it would have a right to tacking should there be any further
advances made to Khalid. The building seemed far from completion, the fact that made
Khalid approach the Building Society Bhd. for another loan amounting to RM4 million
with the security of a third legal charge over the same land. The Building Society Bhd
agreed and upon advancement of the money, managed to register its right as a third
chargee. Khalid, still short of money wants to create a fourth charge over the same land.
He could not find anyone to lend him the money. He approached Bank Simpanan to lend
him RM3 million to fund the completion of the building. Bank Simpanan agreed to lend
the money by way of tacking.
Unfortunate to Khalid, and due to a sudden economic downturn, he defaulted in the
payment of his monthly installments to Bank Simpanan. The Bank successfully managed
to obtain a court order to auction the land at a reserved price of RM13 million. It was
discovered after the auction that Khalid owed the State Authority a sum of RM200,
000.00 as rent arrears. The general expenses of the sale process amounted to
Distribute the purchase money according to the priorities of the parties involved.
Amro Finance had granted one Wan Ismail (“borrower”) a temporary overdraft facility of
$125,000.00 with interest at the rate of 14% per year. In support of that facility, Nik Jamil
January 1999 agreed to charge his property under land office title, identified as
Lot 1572 Geran No. 15325 Mukim Selayang, Selangor ("the said land"), as security.
According to Amro Finance, pursuant to that document Nik Jamil had agreed to be
jointly and severally liable for the loan. Wan Ismail defaulted on the repayment of the
loan. Amro Finance issued letter of demands to both, Wan Ismail and Nik Jamil.
However, both of them ignored the letters of demand. To satisfy the debt, Amro Finance
took the immediate easy step of foreclosing the charge. But to their surprise, it was found
that the charge was never registered with the land office.
a) Based on the above scenario, advice Amro Finance on the remedies that are
available for them. Support your answer with decided cases and statutory
b) Advise Amro Finance on the type of foreclosure proceedings they can take
against the borrower.
Ahmad owned a piece of land in Kampung Chuchor Badak, Kuala Merbau. He made an
application to convert his land which is presently under the category of `agriculture’ to
`building’. He is proposing to develop his land into a mixed residential and commercial
centre. Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) approved his application on December
1, 2010 and he is now busy negotiating with Development Bank to obtain loan facilities
to finance the development project. Adjacent to his land is another land about 5 acres
belonging to DBKL. DBKL decided to develop the land and turn it into a commercial
center cum bus terminal. On January 31, 2011, the Land Office served Ahmad with a
notification in Form A, followed by a declaration of intended acquisition in Form D.
Ahmad was upset with the decision of DBKL to acquire his land which has been
approved for development. He asserts that the size of the land belonging to DBKL is
sufficient for the proposed development. Ahmad strongly believes that the authority
concerned should not approve the application for the acquisition of land for any purpose
larger in area than that needed for that purpose.
With reference to statutory provisions and decided cases, advise Ahmad on the following
a) Whether can he challenge the validity of the land acquisition proceedings alleging
that the land is acquired for purposes other than those permitted by the law?
b) Alternatively, can he be considered to participate in the project and negotiate the
form of co-operation and the necessary commercial arrangement?
c) If the negotiations made pursuant to (b) are unsuccessful, how can he protect his
interest as the landowner in claiming for adequate compensation?
a) The legal and institutional framework to administer and regulate the Malay
Reserved Land institution was introduced in the early 1900s with the intention of
ensuring protection of Malay land proprietary rights. The Federated Malay
Reserved Enactment of 1913 (“FMS MRE 1913”) was the first law enacted to
administer and regulate the Malay Reserved lands. The FMS MRE 1913 was
amended in 1933 and is still being used as the principal legislation in regulating
Malay Reserved Lands.
Discuss the relevance of the Malay Reserved Land Enactment 1933 in regulating
the changing needs of the Malay society in dealing with Malay reserved land
especially in the era of globalisation. Support your answer with statutory
provisions and decided cases.
b) Dato’ James Foong in Syarikat Macey Berhad v. Nightingale Allied
Services (Sued As A Firm) & 2 Ors. 1 CLJ 890 held that in a Malay
Holding there must be a Malay proprietor or co-proprietor. If all are non-Malays,
then the land cannot be declared as Malay Holding. However, if one of the
proprietors is a Malay and the others are non-Malays, then the alienated Malay
reserve land can be declared as Malay Holding.
Explain the requirements that need to be fulfilled by the State Authority in
declaring any alienated land as Malay reserved land.
a) Despite, the guaranteed protection for private landowners’ property rights by the
Federal Constitution 1957, the introduction of the Land Acquisition Act 1960,
appears to confer the State Authority with wide powers in acquiring land
belonging to private landowners. The Land Acquisition Act 1960 appears to be
violating the concept of inviolability of private landowners’ rights to property that
is expressly provided in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia 1957.
Discuss with reference to decided cases and relevant statutory provision on the
powers of the Land Administrator and purposes of land acquisition in Malaysia
b) Discuss with reference to decided cases, the rationale of the discretionary
powers vested upon the State Authority by the Land Acquisition Act 1960 in
acquiring private land and whether there are any possible grounds upon which a
landowner can challenge such acquisition proceedings.
a) It was once remarked that strata titles are 'titles in the sky'. This is to express a
strata concept which is somewhat different from the conventional form of titles
which relate to landed properties. Discuss the procedure and the problems
involved in making an application for the issuance of strata titles in Malaysia.
Support your answer with relevant statutory provisions and decided cases.
b) Explain the role of the Management Corporation in administering and managing
the problems faced in high-rise buildings in Peninsular Malaysia.