NATIVE LAW AND CUSTOM: Declaratory order - Application for - Plaintiffs descendants of permanent residents of forest reserve - Gazette Notification No 760 entitling plaintiffs right to forage or harvest forest produce subject to express conditions - Whether rights similar to practices of 'pulau galau' and 'pemakai menoa' - Whether rights of plaintiffs statutorily created and distinguished from claimed native customary rights practices - Whether conditions attached showed that State retained control over forest reserve - Whether State failed to exercise control - Whether encroachment upon forest reserve without plaintiff's permission amounted to trespass - Whether plaintiffs entitled to damages for trespass - Sarawak Forest Ordinance 1934, s. 12(2)

TORT: Trespass - Encroachment onto land - Plaintiffs descendants of permanent residents of forest reserve - Gazette Notification No 760 entitling plaintiffs right to forage or harvest forest produce subject to express conditions - Licensed timber company granted concession area for extraction of timber - Construction of rail line over part of lands in forest reserve causing damage to environment - Whether encroachment upon forest reserve without plaintiff's permission amounted to trespass - Whether plaintiffs in legal occupation of forest reserve - Whether corresponding steps taken by State to alter conditions - Whether plaintiffs entitled to damages for trespass - Sarawak Forest Ordinance 1934, s. 12(2)

CRIMINAL LAW: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ('DDA') - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking - Conviction and sentence - Appeal against - Whether trial judge erred when invoking presumption under s. 37(da) - Whether prosecution failed to satisfy all requirements under s. 37(da) - Whether duty of prosecution to adduce sufficient evidence that accused did not have required authority under DDA or any other written law to be in possession of drugs - Whether burden of proving licence, authorisation, authority or other matter of exception or defence on person seeking to avail himself - Whether s. 36 applicable to a proceeding for an offence under s. 39B in which prosecution relied on s. 37(da) of DDA - Whether conviction and sentence of accused safe

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction of statutes - Application of - Elements of offence of trafficking under s. 2 of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ('DDA') - Whether prosecution for offence of trafficking under s. 39B(1)(a) of DDA within ambit of phrase 'any proceedings against any person for an offence against this Act' - Whether s. 36 applicable to proceeding for an offence under s. 39B in which prosecution relied on s. 37(da)

UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS: Societies - Pasukan Peronda Sukarela Pulau Pinang - Society established to give residents opportunity to assist State Government in reducing crimes and managing emergencies and natural disaster - Altercation between members of society and member of public - Minister declared society unlawful on grounds of carrying out activities prejudicial to public order - Whether society fell within legal and statutory definition of 'society' - Whether society excepted by statutory definition of 'society' - Whether society lawfully established - Whether Minister had unfettered discretion to declare society unlawful - Whether Minister's discretion exercised reasonably - Societies Act 1966, ss. 2, 5, 6(2)

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Societies Act 1966 - Section 2 - 'Society' - Whether Pasukan Peronda Sukarela Pulau Pinang fell under definition of 'society' - Whether fell under statutory exception of definition of 'society'

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Application for - Determination of legality, validity and appropriateness of appointment of Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor - Whether there was duplicity in proceedings - Whether justiciability of appointment considered in substantive hearing - Whether there was abuse of process of court

CONTRACT: Agreement - Breach - Failure to construct, complete and deliver vacant possession of units - Claim for damages - Whether developer and registered proprietor of land liable to refund deposit paid by plaintiffs - Whether sale and purchase agreement in 2007 (SPAs 2007) to build a seven and a half storey building converted or succeeded by new agreement ('JVA') to build a 15 storey building - Whether plaintiffs played active role in facilitating for changes to building - Whether evidence showed that SPAs 2007 was abandoned - Whether there were reservation of rights under SPAs 2007 - Whether plaintiffs estopped from asserting validity of SPAs 2007 - Whether plaintiffs failed or refused to sign JVA for 15 storey building - Whether plaintiffs had basis to enter caveats on land - Whether caveats ought to be removed

LAND LAW: Caveat - Removal of - Whether plaintiffs had beneficial interest in undivided share of land - Whether plaintiffs paid full purchase price of property - Whether sale and purchase agreement expressly prohibited plaintiffs from entering any caveat on land - Whether plaintiffs had no basis to enter caveats on land - Whether caveats ought to be removed

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Application for - Application to quash decision on education policy - Decision to implement Jawi writing in Malay language subject taught at national type and national schools - Whether policy contravened art. 12(3) of Federal Constitution - Locus standi - Whether applicant 'adversely affected' by decision - Whether public interest litigation - Whether policy concerned matters of Malay language, national heritage and national identity - Whether amenable to judicial review - Rules of Court 2012, O. 53

UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Pengambilan tanah - Kesahan - Tanah gadaian diambil oleh Kerajaan - Perbicaraan pengambilan tanah tidak dihadiri pemilik tanah tetapi dihadiri pemegang gadaian - Pentadbir tanah membayar pampasan kepada pemegang gadaian sebagai langsaian hutang dan mengawardkan baki pampasan kepada pemilik tanah - Sama ada pengambilan tanah dibuat mengikut peruntukan-peruntukan mandatori - Sama ada pemilik tanah diberi notis pengambilan tanah - Sama ada kegagalan memanggil pemilik tanah menghadiri perbicaraan menjejaskan pengambilan tanah - Sama ada pemegang gadaian berhak berunding dan menerima pampasan - Sama ada pengambilan tanah sah - Sama ada pengambilan tanah dibuat secara mala fide - Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960, ss. 11, 12 & 16