Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Things About Legitimate Expectation - Joshua Wu Kai-Ming
Things About Legitimate Expectation - Joshua Wu Kai-Ming
Things About Legitimate Expectation - Joshua Wu Kai-Ming
authority.
Dr. Robert Thomas, Professor of Public Law at the University of Manchester, provided a
may have legal consequences … The principle therefore concerns the degree to
In Law Pang Ching & Ors v Tawau Municipal Council [2009] 3 MLJ 452, Abu Samah JCA and
“A common trait in all these cases is that the aggrieved parties stand in direct
relationship — without any go-between — with the decision makers. The expectation
arises where a person responsible for taking a decision has induced in someone who
retain a benefit or that he will be granted a hearing before the decision is taken. See
De Smith, Woolf and Jowell, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, (5th Ed) paras
8–037.”[2]
ii. It arises where there is an express promise by the authority, or where there exists a
Lord Fraser in the seminal case of Council of Civil Service Union v. Minister for the Civil
In Zakiah bte Ishak v Majlis Daerah Hulu Selangor Darul Ehsan [2005] 6 MLJ 517, the Court
of Appeal similarly decided that “… In law for legitimate expectation to arise there must be
iii. It is based on the duty to act fairly as a necessary element of good governance or good
administration.
The Court of Appeal in Mayland Valiant Sdn Bhd v Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya [2018] 4
“… based on the duty to act fairly as a necessary element of good governance or good
administration (see W Wade & C Forsyth, Administrative Law (8th Ed, Oxford
University Press: Oxford, 2000) pp 494-495. The Privy Council in the leading case of
A-G of Hong Kong v Ng Yuen Shiu [1983] 2 AC 629 held, in quashing a deportation
order, that ‘when a public authority has promised to follow a certain procedure, it is
in the interest of good administration that it should act fairly and should implement
its promise, so long as the implementation does not interfere with its statutory
duty’.”[5]
iv. It is a relevant consideration which must be taken into consideration in the exercise of
an authority’s discretion.
In De Smith, Woolf and Jowell’s Judicial Review of Administrative Action (5th Ed), the
“Although free to alter its policy, the authority is by no means free to ignore the
It is at this point that the fact that the promissee relied on the expectation to his
detriment may be relevant. Detrimental reliance will add to the weight of the
greater the evident detriment to the promissee, the greater the countervailing
legitimate.”[6]
The above extract was cited by the Federal Court in Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang v
[7]
The Court of Appeal in GPQ Sdn Bhd v Constant View Sdn Bhd [2017] 6 MLJ 728 held the
following:
“On the issue of legitimate expectation we agree with the point raised by the
defendant that the doctrine of legitimate expectation is only applicable in public law
and not to private law matters.”[8]
This position was affirmed by a subsequent Court of Appeal panel in Daud bin Arshad & Ors
Sedili, Daerah Kota Tinggi, Johor) v FELCRA Bhd [2019] 2 MLJ 33 (“Daud bin Arshad”).
Tengku Maimun JCA (as Her Ladyship then was), in delivering the judgment of the court in
“As for legitimate expectation, the doctrine was only applicable to public law matters
and not to private law matters (see GPQ Sdn Bhd v Constant View Sdn Bhd [2017] 6
MLJ 728; [2017] 4 MLRA 483. See also Darahman bin Ibrahim & Ors v Majlis Mesyuarat
Kerajaan Negeri Perlis & Ors [2008] 4 MLJ 309; [2008] 1 MLRA 411).”[9]
In De Smith, Woolf and Jowell’s Judicial Review of Administrative Action (5th Ed), the
“… may be overridden by competing public interest, but the greater the evident
detriment to the promissee, the greater the countervailing weight of the public
The Court of Appeal in Law Pang Ching & Ors v Tawau Municipal Council [2009] 3 MLJ 452
“All that needs to be added is that in the present instance there is no overriding
public interest that calls for a negation of the legitimate expectation created in the
vii. It is likely not applicable if the authority acting upon it would invoke a breach of
statute.
In Government of the State of Negeri Sembilan & Anor v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors; Lesco
Development Corporation Sdn Bhd v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors [1984] 2 MLJ 123, the
respective lots allocated to them by virtue of the Collector of Land Revenue giving them
“… in the light of the statutory provisions we have referred to and the authorities we
have discussed it would appear that the equity sought to be raised by the
respondents would establish against the State Authority rights in respect of State
land which it is prevented by statute from creating other than in the prescribed
manner.”[13]
The Federal Court in North East Plantations Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Dungun &
Satu Lagi [2018] supp MLJ 293 agreed with the majority decision of the Court of Appeal and
or not the doctrine of legitimate expectation applies depends on the facts of each
case, it cannot and should not override the express statutory power vested in the
State Authority’.”[14]
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal in Pentadbir Tanah dan Daerah Petaling & Ors v
Bandar Utama City Corporation Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai Damansara Jaya Sdn
Bhd) & Anor and another appeal [2021] MLJU 222 held that:
[2] Law Pang Ching & Ors v Tawau Municipal Council [2009] 3 MLJ 452, at paragraph 48
[3] Council of Civil Service Union v. Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374, at p. 401
[4] Zakiah bte Ishak v Majlis Daerah Hulu Selangor Darul Ehsan [2005] 6 MLJ 517, at
paragraph 16
[5] Mayland Valiant Sdn Bhd v Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya [2018] 4 MLJ 685, at
paragraph 92
[6] De Smith, Woolf and Jowell’s Judicial Review of Administrative Action (5th Ed), para 13-
035
[8] GPQ Sdn Bhd v Constant View Sdn Bhd [2017] 6 MLJ 728, at paragraph 57
[9] Daud bin Arshad & Ors (representing 61 settlers/participants of FELCRA Gugusan Sungai
Ara, Mukim Ulu Sungai Sedili, Daerah Kota Tinggi, Johor) v FELCRA Bhd [2019] 2 MLJ 33, at
paragraph 31
[10] De Smith, Woolf and Jowell’s Judicial Review of Administrative Action (5th Ed), para 13-
035
[11] Law Pang Ching & Ors v Tawau Municipal Council [2009] 3 MLJ 452, at paragraph 15
[12] Government of the State of Negeri Sembilan & Anor v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors; Lesco
Development Corporation Sdn Bhd v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors [1984] 2 MLJ 123, at p. 124
[13] Government of the State of Negeri Sembilan & Anor v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors; Lesco
Development Corporation Sdn Bhd v Yap Chong Lan & 12 Ors [1984] 2 MLJ 123, at p. 129
[14] North East Plantations Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Dungun & Satu Lagi [2018]
[15] Pentadbir Tanah dan Daerah Petaling & Ors v Bandar Utama City Corporation Sdn Bhd
(dahulunya dikenali sebagai Damansara Jaya Sdn Bhd) & Anor and another appeal [2021]
Search
Search
Recent Posts
When Did Dato Seri Najib Razak Exhaust All Avenues of Appeal?
Recent Comments
Another Win For Judicial Dynamism – Peguam Negara Malaysia v Chin Chee Kow on
Protected: Another Win For Judicial Dynamism – Peguam Negara Malaysia v Chin Chee
Kow
Freedom with Limits | deebben21 on Sedition Act: What The People Want