Local planning permission: The right of appeal

This is the case note of MPPP v Lembaga Rayuan Negeri Pulau Pinang & Ors.

MPPP is the local planning authority. Lembaga Rayuan is the Appeal Board formed under section 36 Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA).

The issue to be determined is the scope of appeal under Section 23(1) TCPA.
It is trite law that right of appeal is the creation of statute.

The Court of Appeal ruled that:
1. An appeal to Appeal Board under the Section 23(1) TCPA is restricted to 3 scenarios whereby the local planning authority (in this case, MPPP):
(a) grants the planning permission absolutely
(b) grants the planning permission with condition
(c) refuses the planning permission.


2. According to the Court of Appeal, the Appeal Board is a fast track tribunal in resolving the issues on local planning permission. The limited right of appeal is to avoid the Appeal Board to be bogged down with all appeals against all the directions given by the local planning authority.


3. For any other scenarios, the correct remedy is judicial review and not appeal.


There are more stringent requirements to be fulfilled in the case of judicial review. One has to fulfill certain requirements under Order 53, Rules of High Court namely leave requirement, locus standi (aggrieved person), 40 days after the decision been communicated to etc.
Furthermore, the scope of judicial review is limited to the process of decision making and not the merit of the case.

This case is now pending before Federal Court.

In another unrelated case (the case of columbarium, reported on 22 Nov 2005, NST), the counsel for MPPP quoted the judgment of Court of Appeal and submitted that the rejection of the extension of the planning permission is not appealable, thus the Appeal Board does not have jurisdiction to hear the case. The Appeal board deferred the case to August 2, 2006. Apparently, the Appeal Board is going to wait for finality of decision from the Federal Court.