2010 MarsdenLR 1208

HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK MIRI
LAH ANYIE & ORS – Appellant
Versus
LAND CUSTODY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (LCDA) & ORS – Respondent
[Suit No: 22-59-97 (MR)]

Native customary rights must be recognized and respected, as their extinguishment requires compliance with legal procedures, including compensation, and actions undermining these rights may lead to claims for damages.

Headnote:(A) Sarawak Land Code (Cap 81) - Sections 5, 13, 15(1), 26; Federal Constitution - Articles 5(1), 13(1) - Native customary rights - Plaintiffs, as the rightful occupants of the alleged native customary land, established their claim over Lot 3 and Lot 8 disputed by the issuance of provisional leases to developers without due compensation or adherence to prescribed legal protocols for native rights recognition. (Paras 11, 17, 19, 123, 156)

(B) Custom and Adat - The court acknowledged the practice of 'bulak', validating the Plaintiffs' rights based on historical occupancy and consent from the Berawans/Kenyahs to farm the claimed land since 1964. (Paras 27, 29, 60)

(C) Legitimate Expectation - The court recognized the Plaintiffs' legitimate expectation to remain on and cultivate their land, as the Defendants had tacitly acknowledged their rights over time through government support and infrastructure development. (Paras 30, 38-40)

(D) EIA Report - Recommendations from EIA not followed, establishing the 2nd Defendant's actions as oppressive leading to claims for aggravated and exemplary damages. (Paras 155-164) (

Facts of the case:
The Plaintiffs claimed native rights over land, encroached upon by 2nd Defendant for oil palm plantation development without compensation.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs, declaring the issuance of the provisional leases as null and void, affirming the Plaintiffs' native customary rights.

Issues: Whether the Plaintiffs acquired native customary rights; whether provisional leases violated their rights; and remedies sought by the Plaintiffs.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for due process in extinguishing native customary rights, acknowledged the legitimacy of Plaintiffs' claims based on historical evidence, and highlighted the obligations of the state.

Result: Judgment favored the Plaintiffs, ordering damages and acknowledging their customary rights while rejecting some specific prayers as impractical. (Paras 149, 156, 164)