DR.ONG KEH ONG 1. ) LOKE HON MUN 2. ) HONG KAM SANG 3. ) LOOI WEI SHEN

DR.ONG KEH ONG 1. ) LOKE HON MUN 2. ) HONG KAM SANG 3. ) LOOI WEI SHEN

On the evidence the defendants published false and defamatory statements referring to the plaintiff, malice was demonstrated defeating qualified privilege and fair comment; the Sessions Court's finding of liability and award of RM50,000 damages against each defendant was not vitiated by error and the appellate court will not disturb that discretionary assessment; appeals are dismissed and costs apportioned as ordered.

Citation
AB-12BNCvC-24-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Dr Ong Keh Ong; First Respondent/first Defendant: Loke Hon Mun; Second Respondent/second Defendant: Hong Kam Sang; Third Respondent/third Defendant: Looi Wei Shen
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 November 2022
Case Number
AB-12BNCvC-24-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (defamation/libel) / Appellate Judgment by High Court (taiping) Dismissing Appeals
Outcome
All appeals dismissed: plaintiff's appeal on quantum dismissed; cross-appeal by first and second defendants on quantum dismissed; third defendant's appeal on liability and quantum dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Assessment of Damages, Malice, Apportionment of Liability
Source Language
Malay/English
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Evidence Administrative Law (education Regulations) Libel Qualified Privilege Fair Comment +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Ong Keh Ong

Appellant/plaintiff

Loke Hon Mun

First Respondent/first Defendant

Hong Kam Sang

Second Respondent/second Defendant

Looi Wei Shen

Third Respondent/third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (defamation/libel) / Appellate Judgment by High Court (taiping) Dismissing Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants committed the tort of defamation by publishing libellous statements about the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the published statements referred to the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether defences of truth, qualified privilege or fair comment apply

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the defendants published false and defamatory statements referring to the plaintiff, malice was demonstrated defeating qualified privilege and fair comment; the Sessions Court's finding of liability and award of RM50,000 damages against each defendant was not vitiated by error and the appellate court will not disturb that discretionary assessment; appeals are dismissed and costs apportioned as ordered.

Court Disposition

All appeals dismissed: plaintiff's appeal on quantum dismissed; cross-appeal by first and second defendants on quantum dismissed; third defendant's appeal on liability and quantum dismissed

Orders

  • Injunction restraining the defendants from repeating or publishing defamatory comments or statements about the plaintiff
  • Each defendant ordered to pay RM50,000 to the plaintiff as damages (order made by Sessions Court upheld)