{
  "id": 14315877,
  "title": "Pemilik diarah bayar PR1MA ganti rugi",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/13/pemilik-diarah-bayar-pr1ma-ganti-rugi",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-10-13T22:30:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Free Malaysia Today",
    "slug": "free-malaysia-today",
    "url": "https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/bahasa/tempatan/2026/10/14/pemilik-diarah-bayar-pr1ma-ganti-rugi"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Mahkamah Tinggi Johor Bahru has ordered the owners of the 86 units in Residensi Prima Tebrau to pay compensation and costs of RM15,000 to the 1Malaysia Public Housing Authority (PR1MA). The ruling came after the court dismissed claims for additional compensation due to delays in the handover, violating the existing settlement agreement. Justice Wong Mee Ling allowed the claim by PR1MA, ordering each unit owner to pay a nominal RM10,000 in compensation and RM5,000 in costs. The owners had previously entered into a settlement agreement with PR1MA, receiving full payment, but they filed an appeal for additional compensation due to delays in the handover of their units. In his decision, Justice Wong stated that once all terms of the contract have been fully complied with and its benefits received, the plaintiffs cannot unilaterally withdraw or deviate from the agreed compromise. He emphasized that the acceptance letter (already signed) forms a binding compromise under Section 64 of the Contracts Act 1950. Allowing the unit owners to continue their claims after receiving and enjoying the benefits will lead to unfair enrichment, the judge added. Justice Wong also dismissed the claim by seven unit owners who were not part of the settlement agreement, stating that their claim is barred by the limitation period under the Limitation Act 1953 and they are also required to pay RM5,000 each. The case involved determining six legal issues raised by the parties. The dispute originated from a validly executed Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) between PR1MA and the unit owners between 2012 and 2015, which set a 54-month preparation period for the issuance of vacant possession and common amenities, as opposed to the standard 36-month period. The appeal was filed in 2021 on the grounds that the relevant preparation period had been unreasonably extended by the housing authorities and should have been returned to the original 36-month period, as provided under the Housing Development Expenses (Control and Rental) Regulations 1989. Justice Wong ruled that the extension of the project preparation period was legally valid and binding on the buyer, even though there were legal changes after that. However, the attempt by the plaintiffs to replace that period retrospectively with the standard 36 months is not acceptable from a legal standpoint, he noted. NG Vinod represented the unit owners, while Shahrysham Kamran and Danish Abdul Rasid acted for PR1MA.",
  "summary": "PR1MA tidak lagi bertanggungjawab berhubung kelewatan penyerahan sebaik sahaja jumlah penyelesaian dipersetujui dibayar penuh.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 2,
    "also_reported_by": [
      {
        "outlet": "Free Malaysia Today",
        "title": "Pemilik diarah bayar PR1MA ganti rugi",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/13/pemilik-diarah-bayar-pr1ma-ganti-rugi-14319273",
        "published": "2026-10-13T22:30:00.000Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}