Menara Kuala Lumpur Sdn Bhd and its subsidiary, Hydroshoppe Sdn Bhd, have been granted leave by the High Court to proceed with a judicial review challenging eviction notices issued last year. The respondents in the case include Datuk Muhammad Azmi Mohd Zain and the Malaysian government.
The eviction notices, issued in April 2025, followed the appointment of a new operator, LSH Service Master Sdn Bhd, which has since taken over operations of the iconic KL Tower. High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching ruled that the dispute is not merely academic and warrants full consideration in court.
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had opposed the leave application, citing the dismissal of an interim injunction that previously sought to halt the tower takeover and noting that the applicants had vacated the premises. However, the applicants’ legal team from Messrs Rosli Dahlan Saravana Partnership argued that at the leave stage, the court only needs to confirm that the case is not frivolous or vexatious.
The applicants claim that their eviction was improperly justified by labeling them “squatters” or “occupiers,” despite ongoing legal proceedings in which they sought to enforce their rights to occupy and operate KL Tower. This dispute is part of broader litigation concerning the award of the KL Tower concession, with Menara KL and Hydroshoppe alleging contractual breaches and misconduct that led to the concession being granted to LSH Service Master.
Previously, in July 2025, the High Court allowed Hydroshoppe’s and Menara KL’s RM1 billion lawsuit against Datuk Fahmi Fadzil and the government to proceed to trial, recognizing the need to fully examine the issues. However, LSH Service Master and its affiliates were removed from the lawsuit.
This case highlights how judicial review serves as a mechanism to challenge administrative actions, such as eviction notices, even after an interim injunction has been dismissed. Courts focus on whether a case is non-frivolous at the leave stage rather than resolving the substantive dispute immediately.
I also learned that in complex commercial disputes, particularly involving public concessions and iconic assets, legal claims often involve multiple layers: contractual rights, administrative decisions, and alleged misconduct. Furthermore, removal of third parties from ongoing lawsuits can focus the court’s attention on key decision-makers, streamlining the judicial process while preserving the right to contest governmental or regulatory actions.
Malaysia