Legal representatives in 1975 are seeking to dismiss a breach of contract from Malaysian festival organizer Future Asia (FSA) congressman Matty Healy and his band members in connection with a 2023 appearance at the Good Vibes Festival . In the high school hearing, Edmund Cullen KC argued that the organizers sought £1.9 million (or $2.4 million) assertions “are entirely artificially done to my clients.”

In July 2024, after Healy criticized Malaysia’s anti-LGBTQ+ law and kissed bassist Ross McDonald at the 2023 music festival, future Asia follows after criticizing Malaysia’s anti-LGBTQ+ law and kissed bassist Ross McDonald in 2023 Threat to the band. The three-day event was eventually cancelled. In August 1975, they were unaware that this would be the result of a kiss and advised organizers to “voluntarily accept” the possible consequences of booking them, including the revoked license, based on their previous history of supporting LGBTQ rights.

Cullen objected to the FSA's nail to "personal liability" in court, noting that the claim can only be named for the band company signed with the company. “The allegation of breach of care obligations is not a breach of care obligations at all,” he said. this Independent. "They violated Malaysian regulations and guidelines. That's why this statement is entirely human-made to my clients."

FSA representative Andrew Burns KC retorted that “impose responsibility fairly, imposes responsibility reasonably and allows them to answer for their breach of contract”, based on the fact that the band “can” Think of it as your own play, not just acting in their ordinary role as members of the LLP (Large Liability Partnership). ”

The FSA claimed that they realized the norms and bans they had appeared at the festival in 1975, and they paid $350,000. Organizers insist that the band agreed to abide by the event rules so that their performance application will be approved first. Burns continued in a written statement: “Because the loss was due to their intentional misconduct that violated the explicit guarantee given, the loss should be held liable.