MCST Plan No 4123 v Pa Guo An: Strata Title Dispute Over Glass Door Installation
The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 sued Pa Guo An in the High Court of the Republic of Singapore, District Court, over the installation of a glass door at Pa Guo An's unit in the Eight Courtyards condominium. The MCST argued that the glass door affected the appearance of the development and increased the floor area, violating the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act. The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the glass door affected the appearance of the development and ordered Pa Guo An to seek authorization from the MCST for the installation.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs to the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123. The subsidiary proprietor is to seek authorization from the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 for the glass door installation at the meeting to be held on 18 September 2020. If the subsidiary proprietor fails to obtain authorization, he is to remove the glass door within two weeks of 18 September 2020 or such later date as the subsidiary proprietor and the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 might agree to.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Strata title dispute where MCST sued a subsidiary proprietor over a glass door installation. The court found the door affected the building's appearance.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 | Plaintiff, Appellant | Corporation | Appeal Allowed | Won | Leo Cheng Suan, Denise Tay |
| Pa Guo An | Defendant, Respondent | Individual | Appeal Partially Lost | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andre Maniam | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Leo Cheng Suan | Infinitus Law Corporation |
| Denise Tay | Infinitus Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 sued Pa Guo An over improvements to Pa Guo An's unit.
- Pa Guo An installed a new sliding glass door enclosing part of a patio area.
- The unit was on the ground floor with a patio area approved as a private enclosed space by the Urban Redevelopment Authority.
- The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 argued that Pa Guo An did not seek prior approval for the installation.
- The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 argued that the installation affected the appearance of the building.
- The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 argued that the installation increased the floor area of the land and building.
- The glass door was of the same design as the original glass door, but 1.2m further out.
5. Formal Citations
- Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 v Pa Guo An, District Court Originating Summons No 173 of 2019 (Registrar’s Appeal No 8 of 2020) and Summons No 2529 of 2020, [2020] SGHC 213
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Last contract date for the purchase of the unit. | |
| Pa Guo An registered as owner of the unit. | |
| Correspondence between the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 and Pa Guo An. | |
| Correspondence between the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 and Pa Guo An. | |
| Demand letter issued by the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123's solicitors. | |
| Originating Summons filed by the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123. | |
| District Judge's oral decision. | |
| District Judge's Grounds of Decision issued. | |
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123's solicitors sent a letter to the Urban Redevelopment Authority. | |
| Holding response from the Urban Redevelopment Authority. | |
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123's solicitors replied to the Urban Redevelopment Authority. | |
| Substantive reply from the Urban Redevelopment Authority. | |
| Affidavit filed by a director of the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123's managing agent. | |
| Hearing before the Judicial Commissioner. | |
| Meeting of the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123. | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Judgment date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the installation of the glass door affected the appearance of the development under Section 37(3) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act.
- Outcome: The court held that the installation of the glass door did affect the appearance of the development, requiring the subsidiary proprietor to obtain authorization from the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1993] 3 SLR(R) 630
- Whether the installation of the glass door increased the floor area of the development under Section 37(1) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act.
- Outcome: The court held that the installation of the glass door did not increase the floor area of the development as statutorily defined.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the 'House Rules' were by-laws, and what is the effect of the subsidiary proprietor breaching them?
- Outcome: The court held that the 'House Rules' were not by-laws, but the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan was entitled to use such a 'house rule' in the exercise of its powers, duties and functions.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1988] 1 SLR(R) 103
- Whether the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 could sue the subsidiary proprietor for failing to obtain planning permission for the glass door?
- Outcome: The court held that a lack of planning permission for works within a subsidiary proprietor's lot is not something for which, per se, a Management Corporation Strata Title Plan could sue a subsidiary proprietor for. It is essentially an issue between the subsidiary proprietor and the Urban Redevelopment Authority under the Planning Act.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Mandatory Injunction
- Damages
- Indemnity
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act
10. Practice Areas
- Condominium Law
- Property Law
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
- Real Estate
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 1378 v Chen Ee Yueh Rachel | High Court | Yes | [1993] 3 SLR(R) 630 | Singapore | Cited to support the finding that the installation of sliding windows affects the overall appearance of the building. |
| ACU v ACR | High Court | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 1235 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court has discretion to admit fresh evidence on appeal. |
| Ladd v Marshall | Not Available | Yes | [1954] 1 WLR 1489 | England and Wales | Cited for the principles to consider when admitting fresh evidence on appeal. |
| Anan Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v VTB Bank (Public Joint Stock Co) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 341 | Singapore | Cited for guidance on admitting fresh evidence on appeal. |
| The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4123 v Pa Guo An | District Court | Yes | [2020] SGDC 82 | Singapore | Cited as the first instance decision being appealed. The High Court disagreed with the District Judge's finding that the glass door had not affected the appearance of the Development. |
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4066 v Wong Wei Kit Leslie & Jasmin Lau | District Court | Yes | [2020] SGDC 15 | Singapore | Cited for the District Judge's discussion of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and its relevance to Section 37 of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (BMSMA). The High Court disagreed with the District Judge's view that 'floor area' in s 37(1) of the BMSMA could change or evolve with new URA circulars or updates to the URA’s GFA Handbook. |
| Paganetto v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 1075 | Not Available | Yes | [1988] 1 SLR(R) 103 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a Management Corporation Strata Title Plan can make house rules for the purpose of managing common property, and it need not make those house rules by way of by-laws. |
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 940 v Lim Florence Marjorie | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 4 SLR 773 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a claim for breach of by-laws can be asserted as a contractual claim. |
| Tay Tuan Kiat and another v Pritnam Singh Brar | Not Available | Yes | [1985–1986] SLR(R) 763 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the grant of an injunction is at the discretion of the court, and the court must consider whether the grant of the injunction sought will produce a fair result. |
| Choo Kok Lin and another v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 2405 | Not Available | Yes | [2005] 4 SLR(R) 175 | Singapore | Cited as an example where the court did not order the subsidiary proprietors to remove air-conditioning compressors that breached the by-laws, because other compressors installed earlier would remain. |
| The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4188 v Lim Yeong Seng and Kam Leh Hong Helen | Strata Titles Board | Yes | [2020] SGSTB 2 | Singapore | Cited for the Strata Titles Board's decision that the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan was in the best position to get residents to remove unauthorised glass curtains at the balcony area, since the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan was empowered by the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act to enforce the by-laws that have been drawn up in relation to such works. The High Court distinguished this case because there were no such by-laws in the present case. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Cap 30C) | Singapore |
| Section 37 of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Cap 30C, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Sections 37(3) and 37(4) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Sections 37(1) and 37(2) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Section 37(5) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Planning (Development Charges) Rules (Cap 232, R 5) | Singapore |
| Rule 2(1) of the Planning (Development Charges) Rules | Singapore |
| Section 32(3) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Sections 32(4) and 32(5) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Section 29(1)(a) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Section 29(2)(b) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Section 32(6) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Sections 32(10) and 32(11) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act | Singapore |
| Section 12(1) of the Planning Act (Cap 232, 1998 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 3(1) of the Planning Act | Singapore |
| Section 3(2) of the Planning Act | Singapore |
| Section 37(2A) of the BMSMA | Singapore |
| Section 37(4A) of the BMSMA | Singapore |
| Section 24(3) of the BMSMA | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 32 of the Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 32(4)(b) of the Evidence Act | Singapore |
| O 38 r 4(1) of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Management Corporation Strata Title Plan
- Subsidiary Proprietor
- Private Enclosed Space
- Gross Floor Area
- Floor Area
- Sliding Glass Door
- Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act
15.2 Keywords
- strata title
- condominium
- glass door
- private enclosed space
- MCST
- BMSMA
- floor area
- appearance
- URA
16. Subjects
- Strata Management
- Property Law
- Real Estate Law
17. Areas of Law
- Strata Titles
- Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act
- Land Law