Tealive vs Chatime far from over

PETALING JAYA: The battle between Tealive operator Loob Holding Sdn Bhd and Chatime Taiwanese owner La Kaffa International Co Ltd is far from over. 

Loob has filed an appeal to the Federal Court to reverse the ruling granted in favour of La Kaffa on July 5.

This follows the Court of Appeal’s rejection of Loob’s application for a stay to keep its Tealive outlets open while it appeals a court ruling that prohibits it to operate a competing business to Chatime in Malaysia for two years.

Loob’s application, filed a day after the Court of Appeal’s ruling of the interim injunction granted in favour of Chatime’s La Kaffa International on June 27, was rejected on the grounds that the company breached various contractual and legal obligations to La Kaffa related to its restraint of trade obligations and Malaysia’s franchise law.

“Its lawyers have been further instructed to make the necessary application to the Federal Court to maintain status quo and the said application was filed earlier this morning (July 5),” Loob said in a statement.

Loob has been operating 161 Tealive outlets in Malaysia and their closure will reportedly affect 800 staff.

The company has since expanded overseas. In June, it entered into a joint venture with two Chinese companies with plans to set up 500 stores in China.

Meanwhile, Chatime Malaysia group managing director Aliza Ali said the company is open to assist former employees and outlet owners caught in the circumstances.

“While we are pleased with the court’s decision, we are very mindful of the repercussions this will have on the livelihood of the employees and outlet owners who will be directly affected by the injunction order, along with our customers who have been our business priority from day one.

“Within the scope allowed by relevant law, we would welcome former Chatime franchisees and employees who have been affected by the whole ordeal to contact us should they require assistance from us,” Aliza Ali said in a statement in response to the verdict by the Court of Appeal.