KUALA LUMPUR: The Federal Court's landmark decision on fraudulent land transfers has been hailed as long overdue by the Real Estate and Housing Developers' Association Malaysia (Rehda).

Its president Datuk Ng Seing Liong, in welcoming the decision, said: "Finally, this has happened. This is definitely good news for many of us. We can now say that we are protected."

He added that Redha, in many seminars over the years has openly expressed its dissatisfaction over the decision by then Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin, in the case of Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd vs Boonsom Boonyanit.

"That decision was a talking point in many seminars held over these years and Rehda's stand on the issue has always been that Eusoff Chin's decision was wrong."

Ng said that it was important to protect house-buyers, and also victims of fraudulent cases.

"If you steal a bicycle, it's an offence. What's the difference when it comes to stealing land? With yesterday's decision, land or property owners and even individuals whose identities have been used without their knowledge, are now protected by law."

He added that the decision was not only welcomed by Rehda but also many other organisations who agreed that the decision in the Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd vs Boonsom Boonyanit case was wrong.

The Federal Court yesterday overturned the highly-criticised judgement said to have wreaked havoc on land transactions in the past nine years.

The ruling had apparently caused many landowners to lose their property to forgers. The decision provides better protection for property-owners.

A five-member Federal Court, presided by Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi, ruled that the title or interest of a person who is the registered owner of a property is liable to be set aside if that title is acquired through fraudulent means.

"I am legally obligated to restate the law since the error committed in Adorna properties is so obvious and blatant. It is a well-known fact that some unscrupulous people have been taking advantage of this error by falsely transferring titles to themselves.

"I hope that with this decision, the land authorities will be extra cautious when registering transfers," said Zaki.

The Federal Court yesterday ruled in favour of plaintiff Tan Yin Hong's appeal, and declared RHB's charges null and void. The court instead ordered RHB to compensate Yin Hong RM75,000 in legal costs for the case that had been dragging for the last 23 years.

The other judges were Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria, and Federal Court judges Datuk Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin and Datuk James Foong Cheng Yuen.

In deciding the case, the Federal Court was tasked to revisit the controversial judgement of 2000 in Adorna Properties vs Boonsom Boonyanit, where the then Chief Justice Eusoff Chin had made the landmark ruling  hat a person cannot get back land after it has been sold to a third party, even if the title was forged.

Court ruling a welcomed decision

KUALA LUMPUR: Law experts say the Federal Court's landmark decision on fraudulent land transfers will prevent many people from being victimised in future.

Prof Salleh Buang, a senior adviser to a company specialising in competitive intelligence, said: "Land and property owners can now sleep peacefully. I am definitely delighted with the news. I'm glad that the ruling has finally been overturned."

Salleh, who in the past had been very vocal about the decision by then Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin in the case of Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd vs Boonsom Boonyanit, said that innocent landowners and purchasers should always be protected.

"The previous decision had caused innocent landowners and purchasers, who bought property thinking that they were doing it legitimately, ended up being on the losing side.

"These two parties are the innocent ones, and because of a third party with fraudulent intentions, the innocent people are forced to pay for it," said Salleh, who is also active in public speaking as well as a prolific author of numerous reputable legal textbooks.

When asked if victims of previous cases could take their cases to court, Salleh said: "I'm not sure whether previous cases can now be reviewed, but I'm sure this will be a major talking point."

The professor, who writes a weekly column on land matters in a local daily, added that there were a small  number of lawyers who agreed with Eusoff Chin.

However, a majority of people disagreed with the decision that had caused problems to many innocent victims.

Counsel for Bar Council, Roger Tan, who is also a former Chairman of its Conveyancing Practise Committee, described the decision as a victory all landowners in the country.

He said the Bar Council welcomed the decision despite a "gruelling" wait of more than nine years.

"The Bar hopes that judges below will from now on follow the decision made by the Federal Court, and that no judge will deviate from this decision on the grounds that there now exists two conflicting decisions of the Federal Court because yesterday's decision is equivalent to having overruled or reversed Adorna Properties decision," said Tan.

Tan and another Bar Council representative held a watching brief for the Bar Council.