A club member's failure to pay dues can lead to termination of membership by inertia, provided the club follows its own regulations for suspension and termination.

JUDGMENT

Leong Wai Hong JC:

Introduction

[1] The appellant/plaintiff, Siah Teong Chein, has filed an Originating Summons at the Sessions Court ["OS"]. It was dismissed with costs of RM3,000.00. Dissatisfied, the appellant/plaintiff has filed an appeal to me at the High Court.

[2] I shall refer to the parties as they were at the Court below. References to the Appeal Record will be made as Appeal Record (Part) (volume)/(page) or as Enclosure [x] page [y].

[3] Essentially, this appeal deals with three interesting issues in relation to the right of a club to terminate the membership of its members. The issues are:

i. Whether the plaintiff's failure to settle subscription and outstanding amounts is deemed in law to be a resignation of club membership on his part. [See encl 14 defendant's written submissions Part E1]

ii. Whether the suspension and termination of the plaintiff were in accordance with the regulations of the defendant's club. [See encl 14 defendant's written submissions Part E2]

iii. Whether the regulations allow the defendant's club to reinstate the plaintiff as a club member. [See encl 14 defendant's written submissions Part F1]

[4] The plaintiff was a member of a club known as The Kuala Lumpur Golf & Country Club ("Club"). The Club is operated by the defendant. The plaintiff's club membership was terminated by the defendant for non-payment of membership fees and charges for about two years. He appealed for payment by instalments and for reinstatement of his membership. He was given an instalment plan but again he defaulted. Aggrieved, he filed the OS at the Sessions Court contending he was wrongly terminated.

[5] The evidence shows:

i. The plaintiff has been in default of monthly subscriptions and other charges since 2015. [See encl 4 Appeal Record C (1)/41, 39, 63 to 65]

ii. He was suspended as a member on 1 September 2015. [See encl 4 Appeal Record C (1)/65].

iii. More than a year later, a Notice of Withdrawal of Licence was issued on 29 December 2016. [See Appeal Record C (1)/66]

iv. The plaintiff by email dated 6 April 2017 admitted he has failed to pay subscriptions for almost a year and asked to pay by instalments. [See encl 9 Appeal Record C (6)/841]. This was agreed to by the defendant.

v. The defendant by email dated 23 November 2017 requested the plaintiff to make payment by the end of November 2017 failing which the plaintiff's Licence would be terminated. [See encl 9 Appeal Record C (6)/837 - 840]. The plaintiff did not proceed to make payments to clear his outstanding charges to avoid termination of his Licence.

vi.More than a year after the Notice of Withdrawal of Licence was issued on 29 December 2016 [See Appeal Record C (1)/66], he was then terminated by a Notice of Termination dated 5 December 2017. [See Appeal Record C (1)/68].

vii. The statement of account for 31 December 2017 shows the plaintiff owes the Club RM7,988.27. [See encl 9 Appeal Record C (6) /835]

viii. On 13 September 2021 and 16 February 2022, the plaintiff wrote two emails to the defendant admitting, again, that he has not paid his outstanding charges due to his "personal" income situation. He requested, again, for payment by instalment and for reinstatement of his membership. [See encl 4 Appeal Record C (1)/41 and 39].

ix. The defendant rejected his request by a letter dated 20 September 2021 and email dated 6 December 2021. [See encl 4 Appeal Record C (1)/44 and 56]

[6] In the oral submissions for the appeal before me, the plaintiff's counsel said he relied on the following 3 grounds:

i. The defendant failed to show proof of postage of all letters as well as the Notice of Withdrawal of Licence and Notice of Termination of Licence sent to the plaintiff. [See encl 13 plaintiff's written submissions at paras 25-26]

ii. The defendant made bare averments that the plaintiff has breached the Club's rules and regulations. [See encl 13 plaintiff's written submissions at paras 53 and 60]

iii. The defendant is bound by the Club's prospectus. The plaintiff contend