THE High Court has found the government liable for failures in the response to the floods that devastated Taman Sri Muda, Shah Alam, in December 2021.
Judicial Commissioner Shoba Rajah Dorai Rajah allowed a suit brought by 50 residents, ruling that they had proved negligence and breaches of duty by the defendants.
The defendants were the Malaysian government, the director-general of the National Disaster Management Agency (NADMA), the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Special Functions), the director-general of the Malaysian Meteorological Department (MetMalaysia) and the then environment and water minister.
The court also found the director-general of the Selangor Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID) and the Shah Alam City Council (MBSA) jointly liable.
Shoba said the plaintiffs had established that the defendants owed them a duty of care arising from their respective functions and responsibilities in dealing with disasters.
The court rejected the defendants’ reliance on an “act of God” defence, saying it did not apply where reasonable human intervention could have reduced the consequences of the disaster.
“Once an agency undertakes meteorological monitoring and national rescue operations, it is required to exercise reasonable competence in carrying out those functions,” she said.
Shoba said rainfall recorded on Dec 18, 2021 was unprecedented, but the authorities had the means to assess the severity of the situation.
The problem, she said, was that the available information was not translated into timely action to protect residents.
The court found Nadma had failed to escalate the disaster response, maintain a Disaster Operations Control Centre (PKOB) and deploy the Special Malaysia Disaster Assistance and Rescue Team (SMART) effectively.
MetMalaysia, meanwhile, was found to have failed to issue timely warnings at the appropriate danger category despite its forecast activity benchmarks.
The court also pointed to wider shortcomings in the disaster response, including the lack of public awareness programmes in Taman Sri Muda despite the area being known to be flood-prone.
It found that the failure to identify the appropriate disaster tier delayed intervention, while delays in passing information between district and state authorities further hampered the response.
The absence of appointed liaison officers also affected coordination, leaving much of the search-and-rescue effort to non-governmental organisations and residents.
On DID Selangor, Shoba said the agency could not rely solely on the fact that rainfall had exceeded the capacity of its infrastructure.
“Once the assets were constructed and placed into operation, DID assumed a continuing duty to maintain, upgrade and operate them with reasonable competence,” she said.
She said exceeding the infrastructure’s capacity was not enough to absolve DID where operational failures had contributed to the situation.
MBSA also could not avoid its statutory responsibilities by arguing that certain retention ponds and primary infrastructure belonged to DID.
The court held that ownership did not remove MBSA’s independent duty under street, drainage and building laws to maintain the public drainage system within its jurisdiction.
Case management has been fixed for Oct 6 to determine a date for the assessment of damages.
The residents were represented by James Joshua Paulra, Regine Ng and Ahmad Badri.
Senior federal counsels Mohammad Al-Saifi Hashim, Nurul Farhana Khalid and Liew Horng Bin appeared for the federal government.
State legal counsel Faris Shah Kamarulzaman appeared for JPS Selangor, while Norazalina Hairuddin represented MBSA. – September 29, 2026
