Westingmont wants Federal Court to review NLFCS decision

Court must determine whether “planning approval” amounted to a “development order,” it says.

KUALA LUMPUR: Westingmont Holdings Sdn Bhd, project managers of a failed housing development in Sungai Petani, Kedah, have asked the Federal Court to review a previous decision which it made on November 19, 2013 refusing the company leave to appeal in a dispute with plantation workers’ cooperative, National Land Finance Co-operative Society Limited (NLFCS).

In an affidavit filed by its director, Sangeran Narayanasamy, Westingmont claimed that there were “important and serious issues” which necessitated the apex court’s intervention “in the interest of justice.”

The primary question which it says that the Federal Court ought to determine is whether a planning approval was equivalent to a development order and whether it amounted to an authorisation to commence building works on land.

The dispute arose from a project management agreement entered into in 1999 in which Westingmont was appointed project manager by NLFCS, the owners of a 13.5 acre land site earmarked for the project.

The agreement stipulated that the project was anticipated to be completed within 3 years of issuance of the development order by the local authority.

According to Sangeran’s affidavit, planning approval was obtained on January 12, 2012.

The affidavit went on to say that in order to secure the development order, individual title was to be issued in the name of NLFCS, the land use was to be converted from “agricultural” to “building,” and vacant possession of the land was to be secured.

The agreement was, however, terminated by NLFCS on March 31, 2008.

Claiming that the termination was wrongful as no development order had been issued, Westingmont’s suit succeeded in the High Court and it was awarded general damages of RM2.02 million.

That decision, however, was overturned by the Court of Appeal on November 12 of the same year.

An application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court was thereafter refused.

Westingmont’s application for review claims that there has been “an abuse of process of the Court by NLFCS whereby a planning approval [was] represented to be the same as a Development Order,” the affidavit reads.

Referring to a letter dated September 9, 2013, Sangeran’s affidavit continued, “The relevant authority, the Land and Mines department, Negeri Kedah has confirmed that a certificate of planning approval is not an authorization to commence any building.”

“The Respondent has misled this honourable Court saying that a planning approval is enough to commence building.”

The affidavit also claimed that the use of the land had not changed from “agricultural” to “building” and thus a development order could not be issued.

It also claimed that NLFCS had acted in bad faith by selling the land to a third party while the case was still pending before the High Court.

NLFCS is expected to file an affidavit refuting the allegations and opposing the application.

No hearing date has been fixed for hearing as yet.