PUTRAJAYA: The Attorney-General has been invited to the Federal Court to advise on whether it is constitutional for assessors to decide on compensation in land acquisitions, sitting with a High Court judge.

A five-man bench chaired by Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin said the court would defer an appeal hearing by a developer to Feb 24 to allow parties to serve the court papers on the A-G.

“This case has severe repercussion because the law [Land Acquisition Act] will be unconstitutional if the appeal is allowed and the issue is of public importance,” Zulkefli said.

The court was scheduled to hear the appeal yesterday, brought by Semenyih Jaya Sdn Bhd against the Hulu Langat District land administrator over the compensation offered to the developer after its land was acquired for the construction of a highway in Kajang in 1998.

The developer was in the process of building 57 factory lots when the land was acquired, but during an inquiry it was awarded RM20.8 million without taking into account the loss of profit. Semenyih Jaya has said RM45 million would be a fair amount.

The developer’s lawyer Su Tiang Joo said his client is challenging the constitutionality of the amended Section 40D of the Land Acquisition Act, which came into force in 1998. The issue is whether it is legal for two assessors who sit with a judge to decide on a compensation quantum which is not appealable.

“Our client’s stand is that assessors cannot sit in the High Court and make a final decision,” he said, adding that the amendment also bars a landowner from appealing the decision.

He said the law is against Article 13 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees adequate compensation and a right of review by superior courts.

Prior to 1984, a judge decided the compensation and the assessors who sat with him merely provided advice.

Between 1984 and 1988, a judge sat alone to hear appeals on compensation.

However, the law was amended for assessors to make the final decision while sitting with the judge, and the compensation amount could not be appealed further.

Semenyih Jaya’s matter was referred to the High Court where two assessors sat with the judge and the developer only obtained an additional RM160,000 for “injurious affection” while other claims were not taken into consideration.

The Court of Appeal last year upheld the High Court’s decision on the grounds that the quantum of compensation was not appealable. In October last year, the developer obtained leave from the Federal Court to appeal against the Court of Appeal ruling.

Su, who is appearing with Datuk Dr Cyrus Das and and KL Pang, said the A-G could either decide to intervene as a party to the appeal or address the bench as a “friend of the court”.

“Many landowners will be looking at the outcome of this case as currently there are disputes on the quantum of compensation and the aggrieved party has no remedy for appeal,” Su said. — The Malaysian Insider

This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, on December 2, 2014.