{"title":"双重善意:好还是坏?卡马鲁尔扎曼·本·奥马尔诉雅库布·本·侯赛因案后的难题","authors":"Y. V. Ng, E. Tay","doi":"10.33093/ajlp.2022.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of indefeasibility of title or interest of land is one of the core concepts in the Malaysian Torrens System, stipulated in section 340 of the National Land Code (Revised 2020). All registered title or interest over the land shall be guaranteed and remain unchallengeable against the whole world in the absence of fraud or other vitiating factors statutorily specified or judicially laid down. The debate of whether Malaysia recognised immediate indefeasibility or deferred indefeasibility has been settled by the Federal Court in the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian Sang & Ors since 2010. Nevertheless, the concept of deferred indefeasibility seems to be extended by the Federal Court in Kamarulzaman, which imposed a requirement of double bona fide. In essence, the court stated that for a purchaser to be regarded as an immediate purchaser, he must be a bona fide purchaser for value so that the purchaser following him could be a subsequent purchaser protected by the proviso of section 340(3) of the National Land Code provided he acted in bona fide with valuable consideration.","PeriodicalId":42954,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Wto & International Health Law and Policy","volume":"135 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Double Bona Fide: Good or Bad? The Conundrum after Kamarulzaman bin Omar v Yakub bin Husin\",\"authors\":\"Y. V. Ng, E. Tay\",\"doi\":\"10.33093/ajlp.2022.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of indefeasibility of title or interest of land is one of the core concepts in the Malaysian Torrens System, stipulated in section 340 of the National Land Code (Revised 2020). All registered title or interest over the land shall be guaranteed and remain unchallengeable against the whole world in the absence of fraud or other vitiating factors statutorily specified or judicially laid down. The debate of whether Malaysia recognised immediate indefeasibility or deferred indefeasibility has been settled by the Federal Court in the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian Sang & Ors since 2010. Nevertheless, the concept of deferred indefeasibility seems to be extended by the Federal Court in Kamarulzaman, which imposed a requirement of double bona fide. In essence, the court stated that for a purchaser to be regarded as an immediate purchaser, he must be a bona fide purchaser for value so that the purchaser following him could be a subsequent purchaser protected by the proviso of section 340(3) of the National Land Code provided he acted in bona fide with valuable consideration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Wto & International Health Law and Policy\",\"volume\":\"135 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Wto & International Health Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33093/ajlp.2022.8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Wto & International Health Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33093/ajlp.2022.8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
土地所有权或利益的不可行性概念是马来西亚托伦斯制度的核心概念之一,载于《国家土地法(2020年修订)》第340节。在没有欺诈或其他法律规定或司法规定的损害因素的情况下,对土地的所有注册所有权或利益应得到保证,并在全世界范围内保持不可质疑。自2010年以来,马来西亚是否承认立即不可行性或推迟不可行性的争论,已在联邦法院的谭英红诉Tan Sian Sang & Ors案中得到解决。然而,Kamarulzaman联邦法院似乎扩大了延期不可行性的概念,该法院规定了双重善意的要求。本质上,法院指出,对于被视为直接购买者的购买者,他必须是一个有价值的善意购买者,以便他之后的购买者可以成为受《国家土地法》第340(3)条但书保护的后续购买者,只要他以有价值的代价善意行事。
Double Bona Fide: Good or Bad? The Conundrum after Kamarulzaman bin Omar v Yakub bin Husin
The concept of indefeasibility of title or interest of land is one of the core concepts in the Malaysian Torrens System, stipulated in section 340 of the National Land Code (Revised 2020). All registered title or interest over the land shall be guaranteed and remain unchallengeable against the whole world in the absence of fraud or other vitiating factors statutorily specified or judicially laid down. The debate of whether Malaysia recognised immediate indefeasibility or deferred indefeasibility has been settled by the Federal Court in the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian Sang & Ors since 2010. Nevertheless, the concept of deferred indefeasibility seems to be extended by the Federal Court in Kamarulzaman, which imposed a requirement of double bona fide. In essence, the court stated that for a purchaser to be regarded as an immediate purchaser, he must be a bona fide purchaser for value so that the purchaser following him could be a subsequent purchaser protected by the proviso of section 340(3) of the National Land Code provided he acted in bona fide with valuable consideration.
期刊介绍:
After Taiwan became the 144th Member of the WTO on January 1 2002 and recognizing the importance of WTO research, the WTO Research Center was established at the NTU College of Law in January, 2003 in order to conduct the research on WTO matters more efficiently. The WTO Research Center was transformed into the Asian Center for WTO & International Health Law and Policy (hereinafter ACWH or the Center) in December, 2005 to reflect the broad research scope of the Center. The original focus of the center was only on international trade law. Now it covers three major fields of research and training interests, namely international economic law (mainly WTO and investment), international health law (including the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the International Health Regulations), and international arbitration (including commercial and investor-State arbitrations). ACWH is designed to closely monitor the development of WTO rules, conduct in-depth research on the effect of the WTO rules on Taiwan’s economy, and put forth policy proposals.