Court strikes out suit by 102 taxi drivers against SPAD

Judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam said the plaintiffs also failed to produce a reasonable cause of action against SPAD as the defendant in the lawsuit.

The court made the decision after allowing the application by SPAD to strike out the suit filed by the group of taxi drivers who claimed that SPAD had failed to be proactive in banning the activities and operations of the online taxi service providers.

"The plaintiffs should have initiated their action through Rule 53 of the Rules of Court 2012, that is, by filing for a judicial review and not through a writ of summons and statement of claims.

"The plaintiffs' claims are clearly unsustainable as Uber, Grabcar and Blacklane were not named as defendants together with SPAD in the writ of summons although the plaintiffs had made a lot of allegations against them (Uber, Grabcar and Blacklane)," said the judge, who also ordered all the plaintiffs to pay RM5,000 in costs to the defendant.

Justice Su also said that the plaintiffs failed to show that they had a locus standi to pursue the suit against SPAD.

She said according to SPAD's statement of defence, it had taken appropriate actions including arresting and charging individuals who broke the law by allowing their cars to be used to provide services to the public illegally.

"The plaintiffs' failure to provide details of the defendant's (SPAD) negligence has caused shame and prejudice to SPAD and tarnished its reputation," the judge said after hearing the submissions by lawyer R. Kengadharan, representing all the 102 taxi drivers, and lawyer Ben Syazmin, acting for SPAD.

On Dec 30, 2015, the Klang Valley Taxi Drivers Action Committee chairman, Zailani Isausuludin, 51, and 101 taxi drivers filed the suit against SPAD.

They demanded, among others, a declaration order for SPAD to ban the Uber, Grabcar and Blacklane services obtainable via online, stating that such a service did not come under the Land Public Transport Act 2010.

They asked for an injunction for SPAD not to legitimise the activities and operations of the three online taxi service providers, and to issue a guideline and circular subject to agreement on the terms of banning their services and operations.

In their statement of claims, the taxi drivers alleged, among others, that the Uber, Grabcar and Blacklane operations had adversely affected the local taxi service industry due to the latter's lower fares charged than the fares of metered taxis.

Kengadharan, when met by reporters, said they would file an appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court's decision.