Management Corporation v Lian Tat Huat: Strata Title Dispute over By-law Breach and Common Property Encroachment

In 2018, the High Court of Singapore heard a case between The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 901 (plaintiff) and Lian Tat Huat Trading Pte Ltd (defendant) regarding a breach of by-laws. The plaintiff sought damages for the defendant's tenant encroaching on common property. The defendant applied to strike out the claim, arguing they were not the proper party and the by-law was invalid. The court allowed the application and struck out the plaintiff's claim, finding the defendant was not the proper party to be sued and the by-law imposing on-demand liquidated damages was invalid.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiff's claim struck out in its entirety.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Management Corporation sued Lian Tat Huat for tenant's by-law breach regarding common property encroachment. The court struck out the claim, finding the defendant not the proper party.

1.7 Decision Date

6 December 2018

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 901	Plaintiff	Corporation	Claim struck out in its entirety	Lost	Kwek Yiu Wing Kevin of Legal Solutions LLC Yeo Teng Yung Christopher of Legal Solutions LLC Joshua Chan of Legal Solutions LLC
Lian Tat Huat Trading Pte Ltd	Defendant	Corporation	Application allowed	Won	Tan Hua Chong Edwin of Rajah & Tann LLP Jeremy Gan Eng Tong of Rajah & Tann LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Dedar Singh Gill	Judicial Commissioner	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Kwek Yiu Wing Kevin	Legal Solutions LLC
Yeo Teng Yung Christopher	Legal Solutions LLC
Joshua Chan	Legal Solutions LLC
Tan Hua Chong Edwin	Rajah & Tann LLP
Jeremy Gan Eng Tong	Rajah & Tann LLP

4. Facts

The plaintiff is the Management Corporation of Hoa Nam Building.
The defendant is the subsidiary proprietor of a unit in Hoa Nam Building.
The defendant leased the unit to a tenant, L20 218 Coffeeshop.
The tenant encroached on the common property by placing tables, chairs, and fixtures in the walkway.
The plaintiff sought damages from the defendant for the tenant's encroachment based on By-law 66.
The defendant argued that it was not the proper party to be sued and that By-law 66 was invalid.
The defendant had obtained a writ of possession against the tenant, and the tenant had vacated the unit.

5. Formal Citations

Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 901 v Lian Tat Huat Trading Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 1337 of 2017(Summonses Nos 2140 and 2145 of 2018), [2018] SGHC 270

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2016-08-01	Defendant entered into a tenancy agreement with L20 218 Coffeeshop.
2016-10-01	Tenant began encroaching on common property.
2017-11-14	Defendant commenced proceedings against the Tenant in the State Courts.
2017-11-28	Plaintiff filed OS 1337 in the High Court.
2018-01-10	Defendant filed SUM 184 to convert OS 1337 into a writ action.
2018-04-11	Consent order recorded by the court after defendant withdrew SUM 184.
2018-05-03	Defendant obtained final judgment against the Tenant.
2018-05-08	Defendant filed SUM 2140 and SUM 2145.
2018-07-05	Bailiff handed vacant possession of the Unit to the defendant.
2018-08-23	Hearing of the parties.
2018-09-05	Hearing of the parties.
2018-12-07	Decision made by Dedar Singh Gill JC.

7. Legal Issues

Breach of By-laws
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant's tenant breached the by-laws by encroaching on common property.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Encroachment onto common property
Proper Party to Sue
- Outcome: The court held that the defendant (subsidiary proprietor) was not the proper party to sue; the plaintiff should have sued the tenant.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [1992] SGHC 190
Validity of By-law
- Outcome: The court held that By-law 66 was invalid because the plaintiff did not have the power to pass such a by-law under the BMSMA.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2012] SGSTB 2

8. Remedies Sought

Order for the defendant to take action against the tenant
Damages for the tenant's encroachments
Indemnification from the defendant

9. Cause of Actions

Breach of By-laws
Encroachment on Common Property

10. Practice Areas

Litigation
Strata Management
Property Law

11. Industries

Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Gabriel Peter & Partners (suing as a firm) v Wee Chong Jin and others	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1997] 3 SLR(R) 649	Singapore	Cited for the legal principles applicable to an application for striking out under O 18 r 19 of the Rules.
The Bunga Melati 5	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2012] 4 SLR 546	Singapore	Cited for the explanation that a claim will be struck out under the “frivolous or vexatious” limb in r 19(1)(b) if it is “plainly or obviously unsustainable” on the facts or on the law.
The Management Corporation Strata Title No 561 v Pontiac Land Pte Ltd	High Court	Yes	[1992] SGHC 190	Singapore	Cited to support the position that the tenant, not the subsidiary proprietor, is the proper party to be sued for encroachments on common property.
Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 473 v De Beers Jewellery Pte Ltd	High Court	Yes	[2002] 1 SLR(R) 418	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an MC created under the BMSMA could only have such powers that were expressly or impliedly granted under the BMSMA.
Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 2746 and others v Boon Kee Battery Service and another	Strata Titles Board	Yes	[2012] SGSTB 2	Singapore	Cited for the proposition that the omission of any mention of the imposition of fines or fees from s 32(3) indicated that Parliament had not meant to vest any such power in MCs.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) O 18 r 19
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) O 14 r 12

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Cap 30C, 2008 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Cap 30C, 2008 Rev Ed) s 32(10)	Singapore
Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Cap 30C, 2008 Rev Ed) s 32(3)	Singapore
Land Titles (Strata) Act (Cap 158, 1988 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Land Titles (Strata) Act (Cap 185, 1988 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Management Corporation
Subsidiary Proprietor
Common Property
By-laws
Encroachment
Liquidated Damages
Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act
Originating Summons
Striking Out
Proper Party

15.2 Keywords

strata title
by-laws
common property
encroachment
management corporation
subsidiary proprietor
striking out

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Strata Title Law	85
By-laws	75
Civil Practice	70
Property Law	60
Construction Law	30
Administrative Law	20

16. Subjects

Strata Management
Property Law
Civil Procedure