Justice Su Geok Yiam ruled the action by the plaintiffs did not disclose any reasonable cause.

“The plaintiffs failed to show there’s a duty of care owed by the commission towards them,” she said.

Justice Su added the action in court was unsustainable because it failed to bring Uber, GrabCar and Blacklane operators as defendants in the lawsuit.

The drivers’ writ of summons failed to plead misfeasance in public office, she said. “It did not show the relationship between the taxi drivers and SPAD as well as the latter’s alleged failures in fulfilling responsibilities.”

The court also found the writ summon was the wrong mode of action. “As the orders they are seeking from the court are mandamus in nature, the right mode should be through a judicial review,” she said.

Justice Su ordered the cabbies to pay RM5,000 cost to SPAD.

SPAD was represented by Ben Syazmin while R. Kengadharan acted for the 102 cabbies.

The 102 taxi drivers sued SPAD last year based on the claims that the three ride-sharing services affected their livelihood.

They asked the court to compel SPAD to issue guidelines and a circular banning Uber, GrabCar and Blacklane from operating as ride-sharing services offered lower rates than taxi fares.

They also sought a permanent injunction to prevent SPAD from legalizing ride-sharing services, which they claimed already had no prior approval from the authority.