KAPTEN LAM CHEE KEONG & ORS vs MALAYSIAN AIRLINE SYSTEM BERHAD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Table of Content
1. mapa is a registered society. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. plaintiffs file suit on behalf of mapa. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. defendant filed applications to strike out suit. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. rules on striking out applications. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. no evidence admissible in striking out applications. (Para 13)
6. doctrine of privity of contract. (Para 14 , 20 , 21 , 30)
7. court interprets necessity of filings based on precedent cases. (Para 15 , 18 , 19)
8. mapa lacks locus standi. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
9. mapa's locus standi questioned in enforcing individual contracts. (Para 25)
10. extension of precedents to registered societies like mapa. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
11. mapa failed to show that rights infringed or special damage occurred. (Para 29 , 31)
12. mapa only sought injunctive relief, limiting its claims. (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
13. suit deemed vexatious and frivolous due to lack of cause. (Para 35 , 37)
14. suit deemed vexatious and frivolous. (Para 36 , 46)
15. mapa's aviation safety complaints can be directed to authorities. (Para 38 , 39 , 40)
16. regulatory authority handles aviation safety complaints. (Para 41 , 42 , 43)
17. mapa has alternatives; suit unnecessary. (Para 44 , 45)
18. f