The absence of clear boundaries and representation undermines the validity of native customary rights claims over land, resulting in dismissal of the lawsuit asserting such rights.

[1] First I must put on record that the trial proper was heard by another judge who had since retired as such I did not have the benefit of hearing witnesses and observing their demeanour I therefore have to go through volume of notes of proceeding running into 435 pages and not to mention the volumes of documents. I must however commend all learned counsel for their respective submissions and well research at that, as well as their views during clarifications. All of these have assisted me in arriving at a just decision.

[2] The plaintiffs bring this action (the suit) on behalf of themselves and all the residents of Uma Apan (the plaintiffs). They are Kayan by race and therefore natives of Sarawak. They claimed they have acquired titled lands, individuals and communal native customary rights (NCR) together with the forests thereon according to the Kayan Customs which they practiced within their tana daleh in the Kayan language at Uma Apan, Sg Mejawah, Belaga, Sarawak (the said Land). They claimed that the 3rd defendant had issued Planted Forest Licence No LPF/0013 (LPF/0013) to the 5th defendant and Planted Forest Licence No LPF/0018 (LPF/0018) to the 6th defendant respectively which have encroached upon their NCR over said Land. The defendants had filed their respective defence. However, the 1st defendant had been struck out as a party in this suit so where there is a reference to the defendants that would not include the 1st defendant.

[3] The reliefs sought by the plaintiffs in the suit are:-

i. A declaration that they have acquired and/or created individual and communal native customary rights over the said land and are still the lawful proprietors of the same;

ii. A declaration that this native customary rights of the plaintiffs over the said land precludes any one or more of the defendant(s) from acquiring, impairing, abridging or extinguishing the plaintiffs' rights in the said land;

iii. A declaration that the plaintiffs' rights have been acquired, diminished, impaired, abridged or extinguished by the said licences;

iv. Further and the alternative, even if the plaintiffs' rights have not been acquired, diminished, impaired, abridged or extinguished by the said licences, the plaintiffs' native customary rights over the said land have been adversely affected;

v. A declaration that the issue of the said licences in so far as it diminishes, impairs, abridges or extinguishes the plaintiffs' native customary rights, communal or otherwise, over the said land is bad in law and null and void;

vi. A declaration that as a result of the purported acquisition, diminution, impairment, abridgement or extinguishment of their native customary rights over the said land, they have consequently suffered loss and damage;

vii. A declaration that the 2nd and/or the 3rd defendants are/ is precluded from issuing any licence(s) which purportedly acquires, diminishes, impairs, abridges, extinguishes or affect(s) the plaintiffs' rights;

viii. A declaration that the act or deed of the 2nd and/or 3rd defendant(s) in issuing the said licences insofar as it/they affect(s) or purportedly acquires, diminishes, impairs, abridges, extinguishes the plaintiffs' native customary rights over the said land is void and/or wrongful;

ix. A declaration that the issue of the said licences over the said land is in violation of art 5(1) of the Federal Constitution;

x. A declaration that the issue of the said licences over the said land is in violation of art 8(1) of the Federal Constitution;

xi. A declaration that the issue of the said licences over he said land is in violation of art 13(2) of the Federal Constitution;

xii. A declaration that the 5th and 6th defendants and/or its/their servants or agents have no rights to enter upon the said land;

xiii. An order that the plaintiffs be given vacant possession of the said land forthwith;

xiv. A prohibitory injunction restraining the 5th and/or 6th defendan