UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

Topic 1 INTRODUCTION

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ i
Textbooks...................................................................................................................................ii
Articles .......................................................................................................................................ii
1.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 1
1.2 STRUCTURE OF MALAYSIAN LAND LAW ............................................................ 1
1.2.1 Sources of land law ................................................................................................. 1
1.2.2 The Constitution and land ....................................................................................... 1
1.2.3 English land law and Malaysia ............................................................................... 2
1.3 TORRENS SYSTEM vs ENGLISH TITLE DEEDS SYSTEM .................................... 2
1.3.1 English Title Deeds System .................................................................................... 2
1.3.2 The Genesis of Torrens System .............................................................................. 2
1.3.3 Torrens system under the National Land Code, Sabah Land Ordinance and
Sarawak Land Code................................................................................................ 3
1.4 ALIENATED LAND UNDER THE NATIONAL LAND CODE 1965........................ 4
1.5 AN OVERVIEW OF „DEALINGS‟ UNDER THE NATIONAL LAND CODE 1965 . 4
1.5.1 Capable of registration ............................................................................................ 4
1.5.2 Incapable of registration.......................................................................................... 4
1.6 BASIC LAND LAW CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY ......................................... 4
1.6.1 “Ownership” and “Possession” ............................................................................... 4
1.6.2 “Title” and “Interest” .............................................................................................. 5
1.6.3 “Legal interest” and “Equitable interest” ................................................................ 5
1.6.4 “Real property” and “Personal property”................................................................ 5
1.6.5 “Disposal” and “Dealings”...................................................................................... 5
1.6.6 “Restriction in interest” and “Conditions” .............................................................. 5
1.7 APPLICABILITY OF ENGLISH DOCTRINE OF EQUITY RELATING TO LAND
IN MALAYSIA ............................................................................................................... 5
1.7.1 Is the National Land Code free of English land law? ............................................. 5
1.7.2 Legal Consequences of Land Dealings in Non-Compliance with Statutory
Requirements: A Comparison .................................................................................. 5
1.7.3 The Judicial Developments in Other Statutes ......................................................... 6
1.7.4 Judicial Approaches to ss 206 & 340 of the National Land Code 1965 ................. 8
1.7.5 The „Non-abrogation‟ Theory of Australia on Equity ............................................ 8
1.7.6 Rare Cases of Judicial Rejection of English Equity under the National Land Code
1965.......................................................................................................................... 8

i
Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver)
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

Textbooks
1. A. Maidin and others, Principles on Malaysian Land Law (LexisNexis, Petaling Jaya
2008), Chapter 1

2. S. Buang, Malaysian Torrens System (2nd edn Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Kuala
Lumpur 2007), Chapters 1 & 2

3. K.S. Teo and L.T. Khaw, Land Law in Malaysia: Cases and Commentary (3rd edn
LexisNexis Singapore 2012), Chapter 1

4. J Sihombing, National Land Code: Commentary Volume 1-3 (LexisNexis, Kelana

Jaya 2005), pp 797-803

Articles
1. Ainul Jaria Maidin, et. al., “Challenges to the Principles of the Torrens System in
Meeting Global Challenges and the Evolution of Technology” [2012] LR 16

2. Ainul Jaria Maidin. „Conversion from English Deeds System to Torrens System of
Title Registration in Penang and Malacca: Process and Problems‟ [2007] 2 MLJ lii;
[2007] MLJA 52.

3. Hunud Abia Kadouf. „The Traditional Malay Ruler and the Land: Maxwell‟s Theory
Revisited.‟ [1997] 1 MLJ cxxi; [1997] 1 MLJA 121.

4. Romesh Roy. „Title or an Interest.‟ [1996] 1 MLJ xxxvii; [1996] 1 MLJA 37

5. Kok, „Equity in Malaysian Land Law (I)‟. [1994] 3 MLJ clvii; [1994] 3 MLJA 157.

6. Mohd Akram, „Closure of the Door to the Reception of Equity in Land Matters
Expressly Dealt with by the National Land Code 1965‟. [1985] 2 CLJ 298.

7. Yong, „The Role of English Equity in the Peninsular Malaysian Torrens System of
Land Law: A Review of Salient Statutory Provisions (Part I)‟. [2005] 1 MLJ lxviii;
[2005] MLJA 68.

8. Yong, „The Role of English Equity in the Peninsular Malaysian Torrens System of
Land Law: A Review of Salient Statutory Provisions (Part II)‟. [2005] 2 MLJ cvii;
[2005] 2 MLJA 107.

9. Teo KS, “Equity in Land Law”, [1988] 15 JMCL 57

10. Sethu RR, “Equity in Malaysian Land Law: Scope and Extent” [1989] 1 SCJ 37

11. Kerta-kerta Persidangan Undang-Undang Malaysia Ke-9 yang dianjurkan oleh Majlis
Peguam Malaysia atas “Equity in Malaysian Land Law”.

ii
Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver)
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

Topic 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

 FMS; UMS; Straits Settlement of Penang and Malacca (with Singapore)

 British Residential / Advisory system
 Land tenure v land dealings
 Customary tenure – subsistence agriculture – usufructuary rights1
 Federated Malay States Land Enactment of 1911
 Federated Malay States Land Code 1926
 Charter of Justice 1807
 Charter of Justice 1826
 Straits Land Act 1839
 National Land Code 1965 (NLC)
 National Land Code (Penang & Malacca Titles) Act 1963
 Sarawak Land Code (Cap 81)
 Sabah Land Ordinance (Cap 68)
 Read: Ainul Jaria Maidin, „Conversion from English Deeds System to Torrens
System of Title Registration in Penang and Malacca: Process and Problems‟ [2007] 2
MLJ lii; [2007] MLJA 52.

1.2 STRUCTURE OF MALAYSIAN LAND LAW

1.2.1 Sources of land law

 Federal Constitution
 Federal and State Enactments
 Customary law in respect of certain lands
 Specific legislation relating to ownership or occupation of land – Land (Group
Settlement Areas) Act 1960
 English common law and equity as modified by Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 67)

1.2.2 The Constitution and land

 Definition of „State Authority‟: s 5 NLC

o Hamdan bin Johan & Ors v FELCRA Bhd. & Ors [2010] 8 MLJ 628 at [11];
Kerajaan Negeri Sarawak & Ors v Basnol bin Abol (deceased) & Ors and other
appeals [2003] 1 MLJ 376 CA
o Lebbey Sdn. Bhd. v Chong Wooi Leong & Anor and other application [1998] 5
MLJ 368
 Federal Constitution 1957, Article 74
 Federal Constitution 1957, Ninth Schedule, List II, Item 2 (State List)

1
It is a right of a peasant in a community of subsistence agriculture to occupy and cultivate an area of land
(Maxwell‟s The Law and Customs of the Malays with reference to the Tenure of Land (1884) 13 Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society (Straits Branch) 75).

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 1
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

 East Union (Malaya) Sdn. Bhd. v Government of State of Johore & Government of
Malaysia [1981] 1 MLJ 151; [1980] 1 LNS 18
 Federal Constitution 1957, Article 76(1)(b) & (4)
 Lim Chee Cheng & Ors v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Seberang Perai Tengah, Bukit
Mertajam [1999] 4 MLJ 213 (CA):
„The appellant contended that s 214 of the National Land Code 1965 did
not apply to Penang unless it was adopted. There was no such adoption.
Dato' Alizatul, the State Legal Adviser Penang, on the other hand,
contended correctly in our view, that as the National Land Code 1965 was
enacted by Parliament at the request of all States under art 76(4) of the
Federal Constitution for the sake of uniformity, the question of adoption
did not arise. Finally, Mr Rajasingam agreed, if indeed it came under cl (4)
of the above article, then there is therefore no need for any adoption. We
agreed with the substance of Dato' Alizatul's submission and dismissed the
applicant's motion with cost.‟
 Federal Constitution 1957, Article 95D

1.2.3 English land law and Malaysia

(a) Civil Law Act 1956, sections 3 & 6

 See discussion of application of English land law under Para 1.7

1.3 TORRENS SYSTEM vs ENGLISH TITLE DEEDS SYSTEM

1.3.1 English Title Deeds System

(a) „Title Deeds‟

 A system of registration of instruments affecting title to land.
 Fundamental principle of deeds registration

(b) Nemo dat rule

 Common Law maxim: nemo dat non-habet (no one can give what he has not got)

(c) Weaknesses/problems

1.3.2 The Genesis of Torrens System

 Introduction of Torrens system in Australia, conceived by Sir Robert Torrens

 South Australia – Real Property Act 1858 – system of conveyancing
 Influenced by Merchant Shipping Act 1854
 Hanseatic towns (North German), where core principle is that no transfer of mortgage
or release of mortgage is valid until endorsed on the register. Concept of a conclusive
register.
 Another principle is that the mortgagee could sell on default although he could not
foreclose.

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 2
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

(a) Purpose and Effect of Torrens system

 System of title by registration
 Purpose : simplify titles to land
 General effect on property law: certainty

(b) Three main principles:

 Mirror principle
 Curtain principle
 Insurance principle
 Teh Bee v Maruthamuthu [1977] 2 MLJ 7; [1977] 1 LNS 134 - „Under the
Torrens System the register is everything.‟
 Creelmon & Anor v. Hudson Bay Insurance Co. [1920] AC 194 (PC) as per
Lord Buckmaster at 197:
„… to enable an investigation to take place as to the right of the person to
appear upon the register when he holds the certificate which is the evidence of
his title, would be to defeat the very purpose and object of the statute of
registration.‟

1.3.3 Torrens system under the National Land Code, Sabah Land Ordinance and
Sarawak Land Code

(a) Present system of land tenure

 NLC: Torrens title, s 5 NLC „alienation‟
 Sarawak: Torrens title, s 5 Cap 81 „alienation‟
 Sabah: non-Torrens title, s 4 Cap 68 „alienation‟
 Penang & Malacca: NLC (Penang & Malacca Titles) Act 1963 – ultimate conversion
to Torrens title – Part VIII, ss 94-99

(b) Forms of Torrens system in Peninsular Malaysia (NLC)

 Mirror & curtain principles but no assurance fund.
 Main features:-
o Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San (2010) – deferred indefeasibility (ss 89, 92(1)
and 340) [mirror] overruled Adorna Properties v Boonsom Boonyanit (FC
2001) – immediate indefeasibility
o Registration – necessary to vest and divest title (Buxton v. Supreme Finance
[1992] 2 MLJ 481 SC)
o Any interest effected in accordance with requirements of common law which
when contained in statutory form and duly stamped in capable of registration,
yet before then is able to be protected by entry of caveat [curtain]
o 4 types of caveat (private, Registrar, trust & lien-holder) and prohibitory
order.
 Special position in Penang and Malacca: to convert existing deeds system into a
registration of title system by establishing a special or interim register.

(c) Matters to be considered:

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 3
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

 Torrens title
 Conclusiveness of the Register is only prima facie
See Ho Hon Wah v UMBC [1994] 2 MLJ 393 SC at 398
 Indefeasibility of registration
 Necessity of registration
 Q: Whether the system of land tenure in Sabah based on Torrens system of land
registration?
See: Lin Nyuk Chan v Wong Sz Tsin [1964] MLJ 200
Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance Bhd. v Time Engineering Bhd. [1996] 2 MLJ 12
(FC) - No such provisions are found in the Sabah Land Ordinance.

1.4 ALIENATED LAND UNDER THE NATIONAL LAND CODE 1965

 Perpetuity or leasehold: ss 76 & 76(aa) NLC

 Register document of title & issue document of title

1.5 AN OVERVIEW OF „DEALINGS‟ UNDER THE NATIONAL LAND CODE

1965

 In order that a title or interest is validly created in respect of land, the provisions of
NLC must be complied with: ss 207-212.
 Dealings recognised and capable of being created under NLC may be divided into
those which are capable of registration and those which are not: ss 205(1), 206(1) and
(2)

1.5.1 Capable of registration

 Transfers, charges, leases & easements

Q: What if there is non-compliance with the NLC?
 See s 206(3) NLC

1.5.2 Incapable of registration

 Tenancies & statutory liens

1.6 BASIC LAND LAW CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY

1.6.1 “Ownership” and “Possession”

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 4
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

1.6.2 “Title” and “Interest”

Romesh Roy, „Title or an Interest‟ [1996] 1 MLJ xxxvii; [1996] 1 MLJA 37

1.6.3 “Legal interest” and “Equitable interest”

Kok. „A Review of the Court of Appeal Case of Luggage Distributors (M) Sdn. Bhd.‟ [1995]
2 MLJ cxxv; [1995] 2 MLJA 125

1.6.4 “Real property” and “Personal property”

1.6.5 “Disposal” and “Dealings”

1.6.6 “Restriction in interest” and “Conditions”

1.7 APPLICABILITY OF ENGLISH DOCTRINE OF EQUITY RELATING TO

LAND IN MALAYSIA

 What is not clear about the Torrens system which is being practised in Malaysia is the
extent to which it seeks to exclude the application of English equitable principles to
land matters in Malaysia.

1.7.1 Is the National Land Code free of English land law?

 E.g. law of easements, leases & tenancies

1.7.2 Legal Consequences of Land Dealings in Non-Compliance with Statutory

Requirements: A Comparison

(a) The Selangor Registration of Titles Regulation 1891

 s 4:
„…all land which is comprised in any grant or lease in perpetuity ... shall be
subject to this Regulation and shall not be capable of being transferred,
transmitted, mortgaged, charged, or otherwise dealt with except in accordance
with the provisions of this Regulation, and every attempt to transfer, transmit,
mortgage, charge or otherwise deal with the same, except as aforesaid, shall be
null and void and of none effect ...‟

(b) The FMS Registration of Titles Enactment 1911

 s 4 of the Selangor Registration of Titles Regulation 1891 re-enacted in s 5 of
the 1911 Enactment

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 5
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

 Similar provisions in the Mining Enactment of each of the FMS

 Luk Yim v Chin Chin (1907) Innes 73
 John Gardner v Siau Kuan Chia (1912) Innes 159

(c) The FMS Land Code

 s 55:
„All land which is comprised in any grant, lease of State land, certificate of
title or entry in the mukim register ... shall be subject to the provisions of this
Enactment, and shall not be capable of being transferred, transmitted, charged
or otherwise dealt with except in accordance with the provisions of this
Enactment.‟
 s 96:
„No instrument until registered in manner hereinbefore prescribed shall be
effectual to pass any land or any interest therein or render any land liable as
security for the payment of money, but upon the registration of any instrument
in manner hereinbefore prescribed the land or interest specified shall pass or,
as the case may be, the land shall become liable as security in manner and
subject to the agreements, conditions and contingencies set forth and specified
in such instrument or by this Enactment declared to be implied in instruments
of a like nature.‟

(d) The National Land Code 1965

 s 205(1)
 s 206(1), (2), (3)

1.7.3 The Judicial Developments in Other Statutes

(a) The Civil Law Act 1956

 s 3:
„(1) Save so far as other provision has been made or may hereafter be made by
any written law in force in Malaysia, the Court shall
(a) in West Malaysia or any part thereof, apply the common law of England
and the rules of equity as administered in England on the 7th day of April,
1956;
(b) in Sabah ...
(c) in Sarawak ...
Provided always that the said common law, rules of equity and statutes of
general application shall be applied so far only as the circumstances of the
States of Malaysia and their respective inhabitants permit and subject to such
qualifications as local circumstances render necessary.

(2) Subject to the express provisions of this Act or any other written law in
force in Malaysia or any part thereof, in the event of conflict or variance
between the common law and the rules of equity with reference to the same
matter, the rules of equity shall prevail.‟
 s 6:

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 6
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

„Nothing in this Part shall be taken to introduce into Malaysia or any part of
the States comprised therein any part of the law of England relating to the
tenure or conveyance or assurance of or succession to any immovable property
or any estate, right or interest therein.‟

Judicial Approaches to the Scope & Effect of s 6

(I) s 6 prohibits only English common law

 Devi v Francis [1969] 2 MLJ 169
 Woo Yok Wan v Loo Pek Chee [1975] 1 MLJ 156
 Alfred Templeton v Low Yat Holdings Sdn. Bhd. [1989] 2 MLJ 202 at 222-223
 Wong Ah Yan v Lee Joo Eng [1997] 1 CLJ Supp 282

(II) s 6 prohibits both English common law & rules of equity

 Datin Siti Hajar v Murugasu [1970] 2 MLJ 153
 T Damodaran v Choe Kuan Him [1979] 2 MLJ 267
 Chin Choy v Collector of Stamp Duties [1981] 2 MLJ 67
 UMBC v Pemungut Hasil Tanah Kota Tinggi [1984] 2 MLJ 87 PC
 Pemungut Hasil Tanah Kota Tinggi v UMBC [1981] 2 MLJ 264 FC
 Tan Wee Choon v Ong Peck Seng [1986] 1 MLJ 322
 Oriental Bank v Chup Seng Restaurant (Butterworth) Sdn. Bhd. [1990] 3 MLJ
493 at 495

(b) The Specific Relief Act 1950

 Purpose: to empower the court to grant certain specific and injunctive
equitable remedies and reliefs
 s 11(2):
„Unless and until the contrary is proved, the court shall presume that the
breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately
relieved by compensation in money, and that the breach of a contract to
transfer movable property can be thus relieved.‟
 s 26(b):
„Except as otherwise provided by this Chapter, specific performance of a
contract may be enforced against –
(a) ...
(b) any other person claiming under a party to the contract by a title arising
subsequently to the contract, except a transferee for value who has paid his
money in good faith and without notice of the original contract.‟
 s 3(c):
„Except where it is herein otherwise expressly provided, nothing in this Act
shall be deemed –
(a) ...
(b) ...
(c) to affect the operation of any law in force for the time being relating to the
registration of documents.‟
 Luk Yim v Chin Chin (1907) Innes 73 [s 4(c) of the Selangor Specific Relief
Enactment 1903]

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 7
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

 Chan Gun Lai v TF Anderson Pole (1911) Innes 126 [s 4(c) of the Negeri
Sembilan Specific Relief Enactment 1903]

1.7.4 Judicial Approaches to ss 206 & 340 of the National Land Code 1965

(a) Section 206(3)

 s 206(3) states that the provisions of NLC requiring dealings to be effected in
the statutorily prescribed manner shall „not affect the contractual operation of
any transaction relating to alienated land or any interest therein‟.
 Templeton v Low Yat Holdings Sdn. Bhd. [1993] 1 MLJ 443 at 459
 Kimlin Housing Development Sdn. Bhd. v Bank Bumiputra (M) Sdn. Bhd.
[1997] 2 MLJ 805
 Kwong Hing Realty Sdn. Bhd. v Malaysia Building Society Bhd. [1997] 1 CLJ
Supp 167
 Wong Ah Yah v Lee Joo Eng [1997] 1 CLJ Supp 282
 Tan Chiw Thoo v Tee Kim Kuay [1997] 2 MLJ 221
 Wan Salimah v Mahmood Omar [1998] 1 CLJ 48

(b) Section 340(4)(b)

 Ong Chat Pang v Valliappa Chettiar [1971] 1 MLJ 224
 Krishnadas v Maniyam [1997] 1 MLJ 94

1.7.5 The „Non-abrogation‟ Theory of Australia on Equity

(a) The ‘Non-Abrogation’ Theory

 Barry v Heider (1914) 19 CLR 197
 Butler v Fairclough (1917) 23 CLR 78
 Abigail v Lapin [1934] AC 491
 Breskvar v Wall (1971) 126 CLR 376

(b) The Application of Australian Cases in Malaysia

 Ong Chat Pang v Valliappa Chettiar [1971] 1 MLJ 224
 Karrupiah Chettiar v Subramaniam [1971] 2 MLJ 116
 Inter-Continental Mining Co v Societe Des Estates De Bayas Tudjuh [1974] 1
MLJ 145
 Bhagwan Singh & Co Sdn. Bhd. v Hock Him Bros Sdn. Bhd. [1987] 1 MLJ
324

1.7.6 Rare Cases of Judicial Rejection of English Equity under the National Land
Code 1965

 Verama v Arumugan [1982] 1 MLJ 107

 Punca Klasik Sdn. Bhd. v All Persons in Occupation of the Wooden House
Erected on a Portion of Land Held under Grant No 26977 for Lot 4271 in the

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 8
UDL3612 Land Law I Trimester 1, 2016/2017

Township of Johore Bahru, Johor and Another Action (No. 2) [1996] 5 MLJ
92

Other cases:
 Oh Hiam v Tham Kong [1980] 2 MLJ 159 PC at 164
 Yeong Ah Chee v Lee Chong Hai & Anor and other appeals [1994] 2 MLJ 614 SC at
624
 Lian Keow Sdn. Bhd. v OCF [1988] 2 MLJ 449 SC at 463
 Takako Sakao v Ng Pek Yuan & Ors and another appeal [2009] 4 MLJ 66 CA
 Takako Sakao v Ng Pek Yuan & Ors and another appeal [2009] 6 MLJ 751 FC
 Brett Andrew Macnamara v Kam Lee Kuan [2008] 2 MLJ 450
 Haji Abdul Rahman & Anor v Mohamed Hassan [1917] AC 209 PC
 Malayan United Finance Bhd. v Tan Lay Soon [1991] 1 MLJ 504 SC
 Bachan Singh v Mahinder Kaur & Ors [1956] MLJ 97
 Luggage Distributors (M) Sdn. Bhd. & Ors v Tan Hor Teng & Anor [1995] 1 MLJ
719
 Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance Bhd. v Time Engineering Bhd. [1996] 2 MLJ 12
 Keng Soon Finance Bhd. v MK Mohamed Hassan [1917] AC 209 PC
 Bencon Development Sdn. Bhd. v Yeoh Cheng Cheng [1996] 4 CLJ 25
 Holee Holdings (M) Sdn. Bhd. v Chai Him & Ors [1997] 4 MLJ 601
 Cahaya Ideal (M) Sdn. Bhd. v Orang-orang yang mengenali diri sebagai “Ponga” &
Ors [1999] 3 CLJ 257
 Punca Klasik Sdn. Bhd. v Foh Choy & Sons Sdn. Bhd. [1998] 1 CLJ 601

* Special acknowledgement to Miss Sik Cheng Peng, the previous lecturer for this subject,
for the useful earlier version of this lecture outline.

Prepared and updated by Tay Eng Siang, FOL, MMU (std ver) 9