This case involved a land development project where a subcontractor built housing for workers. One of the houses collapsed, killing a worker. The worker's dependents sued FELDA, who had contracted the main work. The court found FELDA liable for negligence as the occupier of the land, owing a duty of care to provide safe housing to workers, which it breached when the house collapsed. FELDA could not rely on an act of God defense as the evidence was hearsay. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied since the house must have been unsafe. The court accepted that duty of care can exist without a contract under Donoghue v Stevenson.

1. LEMBAGA KEMAJUAN
TANAH PERSEKUTUAN V
MARIAM & ORS
BY RAWAIDA BINTI ZULKIFLI
1411988

2. CITATION OF THE CASE
[1984] 1 MLJ 283

3. THE COURT
Federal Court Civil Appeal in Kuala Lumpur

4. THE JUDGES & COUNSELS
• Salleh Abas C.J. (Malaya)
• Hashim Yeop A. Sani
• Syed Agil Barakbah F.JJ.
• S. Kulasegaran & Tho Yow Leong ( appellant )
• Christopher Foo ( respondents )

5. SUMMARY OF FACTS
 FELDA entered into a written agreement with a firm, Seng Kwee Company(referred
to as the contractor) to carry out land development project in Jerantut, Pahang.
 Unknown to FELDA, the contractor subcontracted the work to the sub-contractor(
Hiew Pin Lee).
 The sub-contractor had built a kongsi-house which was occupied by the workers. The
kongsi house collapsed and the deceased killed in the mishap and left 8
dependants.
 The dependants sued the contractor, sub-contractor and the apellants(FELDA).
 In High Court, judgment was given against the apellants. They appealed.
 They denied their liability towards the deceased on the ground that the kongsi house
was collapsed because of the whirlwind and the deceased was the sob-contractor’s
worker, not them.

6. ISSUES
• Whether FELDA liable for negligence towards the deceased ( Nordin bin
Abdullah)?
• Whether FELDA can rely on the act of pleaded to God as defence?
• Whether the principle of res ipsa liquitor can be applied in this case?

7. DECISIONS
 FELDA is liable for negligence as FELDA owed duty of care towards the
deceased as an occupier of the Scheme and had breached the duty in
failing to provide a safe kongsi house to the workers and resulting the
death of the deceased.
 FELDA can’t rely on the act of pleaded to God as defence as this
evidence was held by the court as hearsay only.
 The judge held that res ipsa liquitur applies in that the kongsi-house must
have been unsafe for human occupation.

8. CASE REFERENCES
 Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) A.C. 562, 580
 Grant v Australian Knitting Mills Ltd. (1936) A.C. 85
 Greene v Chelsea Borough Council (1954) 2 Q.B. 127
 A.C. Billings & Sons Ltd v Riden (1958) A.C. 240
 Clay v A.J. Crump & Sons Ltd (1964) 1 Q.B. 533

9. OBITER DICTUM
 “ by the House of Lords in Donoghue v Stevenson and it was to
paraphrase Professor Winfield, given a decent burial by the Privy
Council in Grant v Australia Knitting Mills Ltd. These cases establish
that a person who have no contractual relationship with him, and
that his liability to an injured person depends on whether the injury
was caused by his act or omission.”

10. COMMENTS
 In Malaysia, the Federal Court decision of Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah
Persekutuan v Mariam & Ors [1984] 1 MLJ 283 accepted the proposition
that Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 overrides cases that preceded
it where courts insisted upon a pre-existing contractual relationship in order
for a duty of care to arise.
 And this decision is being referred today as in the case of Sri Inai(Pulau
Pinang) Sdn Bhd v Yong Yit Swee & Ors[2003] 1 MLJ 273.
 And also in the case of Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd v Steven Phoa Cheng
Loon & Ors[2003] 1 MLJ 567.
 This proves that Malaysia is now developing its own common law
jurisprudence according to the needs of local circumstances.