- Court
- High Court of Malaysia
- Decision date
- 4 Sept 2025
- Case number
- BA-23NCvC-27-06/2023
- Coram
- YA Puan Elaine Yap Chin Gaik
- Practice area
- LAND LAW: Whether the alleged trespassed lands belong to the Plaintiffs or vested in the State Authority – Ownership of river and river reserve area – The absence of entry of a memorial on the title does not deny substantive right of the state authority over the land – Section 46, 49, 353, 382A of the National Land Code 1965 – Section 104 of the National Land Code (Amendment) Act No A587 of 1984 – Section 3 of the Waters Act 1920 – Section 2 of the Selangor Water Management Authority Enactment 1999 TORT: Trespass to land – Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants’ activity of river sand mining and extraction trespass the Plaintiffs’ lands – Whether there was trespass on Plaintiffs’ lands – Whether the Plaintiffs have rightful/exclusive possession over the alleged trespassed lands – Whether the Plaintiffs have locus standi to initiate this action – No actionable trespass proven – No damages proven TORT: Negligence – Allegation that sand mining activities was negligently being carried out and caused damage to the Plaintiffs’ lands – Whether the Defendants’ owed duty of care to the Plaintiffs – Whether there is a breach of duty of care – Whether the Defendant failed to comply with river sand mining regulations and permit conditions – No sufficient evidence of non-compliance – No breach of duty of care proven CIVIL LAW: Indemnity claim – Relationship between permit holder and contractor – Whether a principal-agent relationship – Principal is not responsible for any tort committed by an independent contractor – Counterclaim – Not properly pleaded or proved
- Version
- Alasan Penghakiman 1
- Published
- 17 Sept 2025
- Source ID
- 4f7ea5a4-eb62-40f3-9226-e3372fe213f8