KUALA LUMPUR, July 29 — The 10th anniversary of the Good Vibes Festival (GVF) turned into awful vibes on the opening night last week, thanks to the controversial behaviour of The 1975 band frontman Matty Healy.

The remaining two days of the three-day event was abruptly called off last Saturday following Healy’s expletive-riddled tirade against Malaysia’s anti-LGBT laws which was followed by an onstage kiss with bassist Ross MacDonald mid-show on the stage.

As a result, many vendors who had invested money to take part in the festival were left with substantial losses.

As the dust settles, it’s still unclear who should really be held accountable for the mess that left many with actual and consequential losses due to the sudden cancellation.

To better understand the available legal avenues for possible courses of action against the potential parties, Malay Mail asked lawyers who should really be blamed for such a major blunder.

According to lawyer Derek Fernandez, it all comes down to the specific facts and contractual relations between the parties involved.

"The organiser would have had to take responsibility for all its acts and the relevant approvals and licenses to bring down artistes to perform at the festival.

"The individual acts then would have agreements with the organiser to undertake to abide by all relevant laws in the country and also comply with the local cultural sensitivities.”

Citing news reports, Fernandez said the government had reportedly flagged the band due to past records and the organiser had supposedly informed the band about the sensitivities.

Therefore, Fernandez said that had the organiser provided a guarantee to the relevant authority in Malaysia ensuring compliance with all the acts in accordance with Malaysian law, the organiser may be held accountable for failing to prevent such blunders.

"The event was allegedly cancelled because there was a breach of obligation or condition of approval.

"The organiser may sue the 1975 act directly, however, it will be more difficult for a vendor or ticket holder to do so directly as their contracts to buy tickets or rent facilities would most likely be with the organiser.”

Fernandez said if there was a guarantee given to the government by the organiser that the band would abide by the law, he would argue that the organiser may be at fault for not fulfilling its obligation.

He, however, said The 1975 must be held accountable as a third party for consequential losses and the organiser should claim an indemnity against them for any compensation, losses or penalties the organiser may have to pay out to vendors, ticket holders or other artistes who have suffered losses.

According to Fernandez, if there is a potential lawsuit against the organiser by vendors or artistes, the organiser then should sue the band for potentially breaching its terms with the organiser to abide by the law.

"Presumably if that happens, the organiser should file an application in court to bring in The 1975 as a responsible party and seek an indemnity against them.”

Fernandez, however, said it all depends on the terms stated in the contract between the organiser and the band.

"Every contract with a foreign party states the jurisdiction and whether the contract was governed by the Malaysian or UK law.

"That contract gives the power to the organiser over the foreign act.”

As for the vendors, artistes and those who bought tickets, Fernandez said the party that had collected money from them should be responsible for refunding the actual and consequential losses that were incurred as the organiser’s relationship with them is based on the contract.

"If you want to put the blame on the third party, then you should bring the third party in and claim compensation.”

Another lawyer, Dinesh Muthal, however, said the organiser shouldn’t be the sole party to be blamed for the blunder.

"They gave undertaking based on trust and undertakings of the band that the act will comply with the regulations and existing law in Malaysia.”

Dinesh said the band should be held liable for the financial damages caused to affected parties as a result of the festival cancellation.

"As a support to the main suit, primary liability should be on the band while contributing would be first the organiser if they did foresee the capability and capacity of such incident to take place.

"Secondly, the government should also be held accountable for giving approval to the band despite knowing the band had a bad reputation in other countries.”

Dinesh, however, said the question remains whether the organiser took all the necessary and reasonable actions to ensure such blunders don’t happen.

He also said festival cancellation was an overreaction to the wrongdoings of the band.

"What Puspal (the Central Agency for Application for Filming and Performance by Foreign Artistes) should have done was to take stern action by banning the ban from performing in Malaysia.

"Total cancellation affected many innocent bands who were supposed to perform at the event and also those who were also directly or indirectly affected.”

GVF 2023 was organised by Future Sound Asia.

The company’s entertainment director Wan Alman Ariffin told Malay Mail that they are currently considering legal options against The 1975.

"As legal options are being considered, we are unable to comment any further on the advice of legal counsel,” said Alman in a brief response on WhatsApp.