Court of Appeal upholds dismissal of cabbies’ RM100m suit against Grabcar

An association of taxi drivers failed to reinstate the RM100 million lawsuit against Grabcar for allegedly running an illegal e-hailing service in Malaysia from 2014 to 2017.

The Court of Appeal this morning affirmed the decision of a lower court to strike out the civil action by the Malaysian Association of Taxi, Rental Car, Limousine and Airport Taxi.

The three-person bench chaired by judge Azizah Nawawi unanimously ruled that the Kuala Lumpur High Court had not committed any appealable error when it allowed Grabcar’s application to strike out the lawsuit back on July 14 last year.

She ruled the bench agreed with the lower court’s findings that the association has no locus standi (right or capacity to bring the legal action), among other issues.

“We dismiss this appeal and affirm the High Court judge’s decision,” Azizah said. The other Court of Appeal bench members were judges S Nantha Balan and Supang Lian.

When contacted after the online proceedings, the cabbies’ counsel R Kengadharan said his clients are mulling whether to file an appeal at the Federal Court.

Counsel Jack Yow represented Grabcar - the respondent in the appeal.

On Dec 4, 2020, the association filed the writ of summons at the High Court.

The legal action listed 15 taxi drivers representing the association, and Grabcar Sdn Bhd was named as the sole defendant.

According to a copy of the statement of claim, the plaintiffs claimed, among others, that Grabcar’s e-hailing service, from May 16, 2014, to July 27, 2017, contravened the Transport Act 2012, the Competition Act 2010, and the Federal Constitution.

“The defendant (Grabcar) had jeopardised the bread and butter, earnings, rights and interests of taxi drivers.

“The defendant’s action jeopardised competition and behaved akin to 'predator on a competitor' (pemangsa terhadap pesaing),” the plaintiffs claimed.

The cabbies also claimed that Grabcar had been operating without a licence from May 16, 2014, to July 27, 2017, alleging it was a violation of the Contracts Act 1950.

Through the lawsuit, the cabbies seek, among others, RM100 million in liquidated damages, as well as general, aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages.

However, in Grabcar’s statement of defence filed on Jan 14 last year, the company contended that its e-hailing business is not in direct competition with local taxis.

It claimed that its business involved facilitating arrangements, bookings or transactions for the provision of land transport services by drivers for passengers through an online mobile platform.

The company then filed an application to strike out the civil suit, which the High Court allowed on July 14 last year.

According to a copy of the striking-out decision, judge Ahmad Bache ruled that the association - registered under Section 7 of the Societies Act 1966 - does not have locus standi to seek damages allegedly caused by Grabcar.

The judge had ruled that the legal action was time-barred as it was filed on Dec 4, 2020, which was more than six years after the alleged actionable act by Grabcar, namely a purported breach of the Road Transport Act 2012 (RTA), Competition Act 2010, Contracts Act 1950 and the Federal Constitution.

Ahmad said that the issue of time-barred was as per Section 6(1) of the Limitation Act 1953.

The judge ruled that RTA does not grant a private right to the association to sue Grabcar for alleged breaches of the act.

Ahmad added that Section 64 of Competition also does not allow the association to commence a private action in the event the Competition Commission makes no finding of infringement against Grabcar.

Expensive rides: Passengers hit out at Grab's 'price bump'

Court stays hearing of Grab's challenge against RM86.77m proposed fine

Jan 10 hearing set for Grab's bid to quash RM86m proposed fine

Govt to tackle problems facing GrabFood, Foodpanda riders - Saravanan