Collector of Land Revenue v Mustaq Ahmad: Land Acquisition Compensation & Provisional Development Permission

In Collector of Land Revenue v Mustaq Ahmad, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal by the Collector of Land Revenue against the decision of the Appeals Board regarding compensation awarded to Mustaq Ahmad for the acquisition of his properties. The primary legal issue was whether the Appeals Board contravened section 33(5)(e) of the Land Acquisition Act by considering provisional permission to amend development plans when determining compensation. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, remitting the case back to the Appeals Board for recomputation of compensation based on existing written permission.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Court of Appeal addressed whether the Appeals Board correctly considered provisional permission to amend development plans when awarding compensation for land acquisition.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Collector of Land RevenueAppellantGovernment AgencyAppeal AllowedWon
Tan Hee Joek of State Counsel
Mustaq Ahmad s/o MustafaRespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chao Hick TinJudge of AppealNo
Tan Lee MengJudgeNo
Yong Pung HowChief JusticeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Mustaq owned properties at No 38 and No 40 Owen Road.
  2. The properties were acquired on 28 June 1996 for the North-East MRT Line construction.
  3. The properties had a total area of 475 square metres.
  4. Written permission was granted for a 3-storey residential building with a restaurant.
  5. Provisional permission was obtained to add a 4th storey and convert the building to a boarding house.
  6. The provisional permission lapsed before the properties were acquired.
  7. Mustaq claimed $7,107,500 as compensation.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Collector of Land Revenue v Mustaq Ahmad s/o Mustafa, CA 600100/2001, [2002] SGCA 14

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Written permission granted for development of the site.
Construction work began.
Construction work suspended.
Provisional permission obtained for amendments.
Provisional permission valid for 6 months.
Properties acquired for public purpose.
Collector awarded $3,300,000 as compensation.
Mustaq submitted a revised claim for $5,850,000.
Appeal allowed with costs.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Valuation of Land for Compensation
    • Outcome: The court held that the Appeals Board acted in contravention of section 33(5)(e) of the Land Acquisition Act by taking into account the provisional permission for the purpose of awarding Mustaq compensation for the acquisition of his properties.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Consideration of provisional permission
      • Market value determination

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Compensation for Land Acquisition

9. Cause of Actions

  • Land Acquisition
  • Compensation Claim

10. Practice Areas

  • Real Estate Law
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • Real Estate
  • Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Beauty Park Development (Pte) Ltd v Collector of Land RevenueAppeals BoardYes[1991] 2 MLJ liSingaporeCited for the principle that 'in principle' approval should not be taken into account for determining compensation payable to the owners.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Land Acquisition Act (Cap 152) s 33(5)(e)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Land Acquisition
  • Compensation
  • Provisional Permission
  • Market Value
  • Section 33(5)(e) Land Acquisition Act
  • Written Permission
  • Appeals Board

15.2 Keywords

  • Land Acquisition
  • Compensation
  • Provisional Permission
  • Singapore
  • Property Law

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Land Law
  • Valuation Law