SHAH ALAM: Several public authorities and the Federal Government have been held liable by the High Court for failing to carry out operational duties during the devastating floods that hit Taman Sri Muda here in 2021.
Judicial Commissioner DR Shoba Rajah also rejected the “Act of God” defence put up by the seven defendants, who had contended that the extreme rainfall could not reasonably have been prevented.
The court allowed the claims of the 50 Taman Sri Muda residents for the losses they suffered during the floods.
The defendants comprised the director-general of the National Disaster Management Agency (Nadma), the director-general of the Malaysian Meteorological Department (METMalaysia), the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Special Affairs), and the Environment and Water Minister, as well as the Federal Government.
The court also found the director of the Selangor Irrigation and Drainage Department, Shah Alam City Council (MBSA), jointly liable with the Federal Government.
The court has fixed Oct 6 for case management to set the hearing date for assessment of damages.
The plaintiffs are pleading negligence, failures in flood management, drainage, weather warnings and disaster response which contributed to their losses.
They sought RM3,767,148.51 in special damages, general and aggravated damages.
In the judgment yesterday, JC Shoba Rajah said it was insufficient merely to establish that the rainfall was exceptionally severe or that it exceeded the original design capacity of the drainage and flood-control infrastructure.
She said the defendants had to show that the event was so unprecedented that no reasonable foresight, preparation or operational response could have guarded against the resulting harm, and the plaintiffs had established the operational failures by the defendants, hence preventing the rainfall from being treated as a complete defence.
The court also found that Nadma and METMalaysia had breached their operational duties.
JC Shoba Rajah said once the agencies undertook disaster-management, meteorological and warning responsibilities, they were required to perform those responsibilities competently and with reasonable regard for the safety of persons exposed to a foreseeable flood risk.
The court also found that the liability arising from the operational breaches of Nadma and MetMalaysia was attached to the Federal Government, therefore holding the Federal Government liable as well.
On JPS Selangor, the court accepted that the infrastructure had been designed according to those post-1995 benchmarks.
However, the court said rainfall exceeding the original design assumptions did not, by itself, absolve JPS of liability.
Once the flood-control assets had been constructed and placed under JPS’ control, it assumed a continuing operational duty to manage, maintain and operate them with reasonable competence, the judge said.
On MBSA’s defence that the principal flood-control assets, including the retention ponds and pumping facilities, belonged to JPS rather than the council, the court found this did not extinguish MBSA’s separate and independent responsibilities as the local authority for the repair, alteration, maintenance, clearance and cleansing of surface and stormwater drains under its control.
The judge said the plaintiffs had proven the existence of operational duties of care, breaches of those duties and a sufficient causal connection between the failures of the remaining defendants and the harm suffered.
She said the case concerned failures in the implementation and operation of disaster-management, meteorological, drainage and flood-control responsibilities and held the defendants fully liable.
