MOHD HAFARUZI BIN HARUN 1. ) XXXX 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

MOHD HAFARUZI BIN HARUN 1. ) XXXX 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

On the evidence and in context the offending paragraph did not carry a defamatory meaning as understood by reasonable readers; contemporaneous records and witness evidence established the factual basis so that the statement was true or substantially true (justification) and/or fair comment and was made on a privileged occasion without malice; plaintiff failed to discharge his onus and claim must be dismissed.

Citation
WA-23NCvC-35-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohd Hafaruzi bin Harun; First Defendant: Rohaizat bin Yon; Second Defendant: Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia; Third Defendant: Kerajaan Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 October 2023
Case Number
WA-23NCvC-35-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Justification (s.8 Defamation Act 1957), Fair Comment (s.9 Defamation Act 1957), Qualified Privilege, Burden of Proof, Publication, Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Defamation Tort Administrative Law Justification (s.8 Defamation Act 1957) Fair Comment (s.9 Defamation Act 1957) Qualified Privilege Burden of Proof Publication +1 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd Hafaruzi bin Harun

Plaintiff

Rohaizat bin Yon

First Defendant

Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia

Second Defendant

Kerajaan Malaysia

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the impugned paragraph was defamatory in context
  2. 2 Whether the statement referred to the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the statement was published to third parties

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence and in context the offending paragraph did not carry a defamatory meaning as understood by reasonable readers; contemporaneous records and witness evidence established the factual basis so that the statement was true or substantially true (justification) and/or fair comment and was made on a privileged occasion without malice; plaintiff failed to discharge his onus and claim must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Costs of RM30,000.00 awarded to defendants to be paid by plaintiff within 30 days