Resolving a Complex Property Boundary Dispute

Our client, a property owner in a residential area of Johor Bahru, discovered that his neighbour had constructed a boundary wall that encroached approximately 1.2 metres onto his land. The encroachment was discovered during a routine survey conducted when our client decided to sell the property. The prospective buyer's valuer flagged the discrepancy between the title plan and the physical boundary, and the sale fell through.

The Nature of the Dispute

The neighbour insisted that the wall had been built in the correct position based on an informal agreement between the previous owners, dating back over twenty years. Our client's land title, issued under the National Land Code 1965, clearly showed the boundary line as demarcated by the Land Office. The neighbour had no documentary evidence of any agreement, easement, or variation to the title.

The neighbour had also extended his garden and built a small shed on the encroached portion. The total area in dispute was modest in size but significant in value, as the property was located in a desirable area of JB where land prices had appreciated substantially.

Legal Framework

Under the National Land Code 1965, the boundaries defined in the issue document of title (geran or hakmilik) are conclusive evidence of the extent of a proprietor's land. Any physical structure that encroaches onto another person's titled land constitutes trespass. The registered proprietor has the right to seek an order for the removal of the encroachment and damages for trespass.

The concept of adverse possession, which might apply in some jurisdictions, has very limited application in Malaysia after the coming into force of the National Land Code. Registered titles under the Torrens system provide strong protection to the registered proprietor.

Our Approach

Our first step was to engage a licensed land surveyor to conduct a resurvey of both properties. The surveyor produced a detailed report confirming the encroachment of 1.2 metres along a stretch of approximately fifteen metres. The survey plan was overlaid on the certified plan from the Land Office, removing any doubt about the boundary's correct position.

We wrote to the neighbour enclosing the survey report and requesting that the wall, garden extension, and shed be removed within thirty days. The neighbour responded through his lawyer, disputing the survey findings and claiming that our client had acquiesced to the boundary for many years by not objecting earlier.

Escalation and Mediation

We considered filing a suit for trespass and ejectment in the Johor Bahru High Court. However, litigation over boundary disputes can be protracted and expensive, and the relationship between neighbours would be destroyed entirely. We proposed mediation as a first step, which the neighbour reluctantly agreed to.

During mediation, we presented the survey evidence and made clear that we were prepared to go to court if necessary. The neighbour's lawyer advised his client that the survey evidence was difficult to contest and that a court would likely order removal of the wall and structures, plus costs. The mediator, an experienced property lawyer, helped both parties explore practical solutions.

The Settlement

After two mediation sessions, the parties reached a settlement. The neighbour agreed to remove the encroaching wall and shed at his own expense within sixty days. He was also given the option to purchase the narrow strip of land, which would have required a subdivision and amalgamation under the National Land Code. The neighbour chose not to pursue the purchase, as the costs of the land office procedures and the premium payable to the state authority made it uneconomical for such a small parcel.

The settlement agreement was formalised through our firm and included a mutual release of claims, an undertaking by the neighbour to complete the removal works within the agreed timeframe, and a provision for our client to re-engage the surveyor to verify compliance. Our client's legal costs were borne by the neighbour as part of the settlement.

Key Takeaways

Boundary disputes are more common than many property owners realise, especially in older JB neighbourhoods where boundaries were less precisely demarcated at the time of original development. A current land survey is the single most important piece of evidence in any boundary dispute. If you are buying property, commissioning a survey before completing the purchase can save significant trouble later.

Mediation should always be considered as a first option in neighbour disputes. It is faster, cheaper, and less destructive than litigation. That said, a willingness to litigate gives you leverage at the negotiating table. Having a clear survey report and a firm legal position strengthens your hand considerably.

If you are dealing with a boundary or land dispute in Johor Bahru, contact our property law team for practical advice.