Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

What is this Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance Bhd v Time Engineering Berhad [1996] 2 CLJ 561 (Borneo Finance Case) about in regards to Sabah ?

0
Posted

What is this Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance Bhd v Time Engineering Berhad [1996] 2 CLJ 561 (Borneo Finance Case) about in regards to Sabah ?

0
Glen Moore10

Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance Berhad   is the company authorized to offer home financing to state civil servants in Sabah and Sarawak under the State Government Home Financing Scheme. Similar facility is extended to employee of state government agencies and statutory bodies. I think that is a great help for habitants. If I need in the mortgage help then I address at Mortgage Advice Hull and I’m always satisfied in the end. If I have any questions, I always get clear answers. It is great that nowadays there are many companies who offer you a huge number of different services. With centuries our life has changed, and it has become much more comfortable.

0

This is a Federal Court case (highest in Malaysia). In this case, the Chargor (Developer) applied for a bridging loan from Borneo Housing Mortgage Finance on 1 March 1982 and entered into a Sale & Purchase with Time Engineering on 2 Nov 1982. The Charge was created on 28 May 1983. By 23 May 1986, Time Engineering has fully paid the amount to the Chargor. However, Chargor defaulted and subsequently the property was auctioned off to a third party on 30 Nov 1991. This case confirms the requirement for validity of registration (Section 88 of SLO) as paramount. The Charge was registered while the Sale & Purchase was not as there is no Sub-Title. The Developer is not a Bare Trustee until ALL payment is made and gives a registrable transfer (rather than date of Sale & Purchase as argued). (Registrable has special meaning which is the MOT must be signed, witnessed and dated) And this transfer has to be registered if one wants to claim priority (Section 88 of SLO). Arguing the Developer as a Ba

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.