Non-Disclosure of Valuers’ Report in Land Reference Proceedings: A Fundamental Error or a Curable Mistake?

Case Review: Loyal Synergy Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Timur Laut Pulau Pinang [2026] 4 MLRA 74

Land reference proceedings involve the Court’s determination of compensation for a land which has been compulsorily acquired. Such proceedings involve the consideration of valuation reports by assessors appointed by parties and as may be appointed by the Court. While the Court is not bound by the opinions expressed in such reports, the same forms evidence to be considered for the purpose of a fair and reasonable compensation to be determined.

The question then arises – What happens when the Court relies on the written opinion of an assessor which was not produced for the relevant parties’ address of the same? The Court of Appeal recently revisited this in Loyal Synergy Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Timur Laut Pulau Pinang [2026] 4 MLRA 74 where the High Court’s compensation award was set aside premised on the failure to disclose the written opinions of appointed assessors to the parties before judgment was delivered. The decision underscores that transparency in land reference proceedings is not merely a statutory requirement under the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (“LAA”) but a constitutional safeguard under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution.

What Are the Facts?

The Appellant owned a parcel of land in Penang, a portion of which was compulsorily acquired by the State for a public road project. The Land Administrator valued the acquired land at RM1,000,000 (approximately RM2,212.39 per square metre). The Appellant disputed the valuation and argued for a much higher rate of RM4,377.62 per square metre, backed by a private valuation report citing different comparable transactions.

The matter proceeded to the High Court, where the High Court appointed two assessors to assist in determining a fair compensation figure (“Court-Appointed Assessors”).

The High Court increased the compensation to RM1,200,400 (RM2,450.00 per square metre) (“High Court Decision”), relying substantially on written opinions of the Court-Appointed Assessors to calculate key variables such as time adjustments, locational factors and land size. The Appellant’s higher claim for compensation was rejected.

However, neither party had ever been shown the written opinions of the Court-Appointed Assessors before the judgment was handed down. This formed part of the Appellant’s grounds to appeal against the High Court Decision.

What Did the Court of Appeal Decide?

While the Appellant raised several arguments, the Court of Appeal focused on a single, determinative issue and answered the same in the affirmative:

Did the High Court Judge (HC) err by failing to disclose the assessors’ Written Opinions to the parties before delivering the final decision?

The Federal Court Has Already Determined that Opinions of Assessors Must be Disclosed – The Court of Appeal considered the Federal Court decision in Tegas Sejati Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah dan Daerah Hulu Langat & Anor [2024] 4 CLJ 1 where it was determined that if judges are required to provide their reasons for arriving at any decision, all the more the opinion of the assessors, which the law mandates must be in writing and must be made available to parties. Such opinion forms part of the records of the land reference proceedings. The availability of these written opinions is integral to the rule of law that there is transparency and fairness in the conduct of these proceedings where, once available, must be provided to the parties.

Reemphasis and Clarification of the “Right of be Heard” and Disclosure of Written Opinions – The Court of Appeal’s decision to allow the appeal was also anchored in the foundational principle of audi alteram partem, or the right to be heard. While a judge is not bound by the opinions of assessors, their written opinions form crucial evidence which the court must consider. The Court-Appointed Assessors’ written opinions served as the “engine room” of the High Court’s judgment, providing the essential data used to calculate variables like time, location, and land size. To use the reports as a foundation for the court’s decision while denying the parties sight of them is to deny the parties the right to be heard on a central component of the case. The Court of Appeal clarified that Article 13 of the Federal Constitution and Section 40C of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 demand a high standard of procedural fairness. For disclosure to be more than a mere formality, it must occur early enough for parties to craft meaningful submissions before a final decision is reached.

Current Law At the Time of the Appeal Shall be Considered – The Court also observed that the landmark Federal Court decision in Tegas Sejati (supra) was not cited by the Appellant during the High Court hearing. The Appellant nonetheless sought to rely on it before the Court of Appeal. The Court confirmed that appellate courts are bound by the law as it stands at the time of the appeal, not as it stood during the original hearing. Requiring appellate courts to uphold a legal position later declared erroneous by the Federal Court would be “jurisprudentially incongruous and fundamentally unjust”. Justice must be grounded in current law.

The Court of Appeal unanimously set aside the High Court’s decision, remitted the matter to the High Court for a full rehearing with a specific direction that any assessors’ report must be furnished to all parties within a reasonable time before hearing final arguments.

Key Takeaways and Practical Consideration

The Importance of Promptness in Land Reference Proceedings – It is important to ensure that any requests for valuation reports or opinions, whether prepared by parties’ appointed assessors or by Court-appointed assessors, are immediately requested without delay. Delays in such request may result in unnecessary hurdles at a later stage of proceedings and impede upon a final determination by the High Court.

Dissect and Evaluate All Assessors’ Reports or Opinions – While parties may be focused on their own valuation reports in comparison with other parties, it is equally important to ensure that the written reports / opinions of Court-appointed assessors are also studied to ensure that any contrary opinion, information or valuation methodology taken is addressed in full for the High Court’s full and informed deliberation of a fair and reasonable compensation award.

This article was authored by Chen Yun Jin (Partner), Nimisha Jaya Gobi (Partner), Jaden Teo (Associate) and Law Jing Yu (Pupil-in-Chambers).

---