ISSUE 3/2023 – PLAINTIFF FAILS TO DEFEAT A GUARDED NEIGHBOURHOOD SCHEME!

Court of Appeal’s decision in RANJAN PARAMALINGAM & ANOR v. PERSATUAN PENDUDUK TAMAN BANGSAR, KUALA LUMPUR

The appellants (plaintiffs) had filed a claim against the respondent (defendant) for the tort of public and private nuisance and breach of the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 (PDPA).

The defendant was the residents’ association in which the plaintiff’s property was located and had erected a guardhouse and boom gate under its guarded neighbourhood scheme (GN scheme) and collected information of non-members/visitors who entered the area.

The plaintiffs argued that the defendant was operating an illegal security business within the GN area; that the approval that was given by the third party/local authority for the GN scheme was unlawful; that they were entitled to travel within the GN area without obstruction; and that the collection of personal information of persons entering the area was in breach of the PDPA.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiffs’ appeal upon finding:-

• that the requirements of law to mount a claim for the tort of nuisance had not been fulfilled;

• that the third party/local authority had the residual power to approve the GN scheme; that the non-compliance with the PDPA could not be a cause of action in a civil suit;

• and that the principle of law laid down in Au Kean Hoe v. Persatuan Penduduk D’villa Equestrian on a gated and guarded scheme applied to the GN scheme.